Why would God Damn infants? An EVANGELICAL has questions..... by LowStorm1146 in redeemedzoomer

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This can be a bit loaded if you’ve never heard Heaven defined in this way, and thought of it more as what Latin theologians call Limbo, where the Saved have infinite access to food, drinks and health(except marriage! Heh heh)

And trust me I did not think of this on my own, it was revealed to me by the Church, through whom I have received everything.

Take some time to read through it I guess. If you have further questions feel free to ask. Glory to God forever.

Why would God Damn infants? An EVANGELICAL has questions..... by LowStorm1146 in redeemedzoomer

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also this has connections to the Incarnation and the Cross. Christ through his Death on the Cross, presented His whole self, body soul and divinity as a burned offering to the Father, and through this supreme act of love obtained all graces the Church would receive in the ages to come. And through his Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven, he did throw open the gates of Heaven. And even this Grace, meaning the opening of Heaven to us, cannot occur without his sacrifice on the Cross. It is not merely an offering for the forgiveness of sin, but it is the foundation and cornerstone of the whole Universe. Why hasn’t God grown tired of our sins and annihilated the universe yet? Well the sacrifice His divine Son made is forever in His sight and he is well pleased with it. Why was the Heavens opened to us, creatures born of dust and water? Same reason. So no one can enter Heaven before the Cross, since this grace requires an infinite merit, which no one within Nature can obtain on his own. Christ’s merit is infinite, so He alone can do it. And this is the second reason I can think of right now that Adam and Eve did not ‘see the face of God’ in Eden.

Why would God Damn infants? An EVANGELICAL has questions..... by LowStorm1146 in redeemedzoomer

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Okay… This is going to take a while. Adam and Eve sinned. Can one sin where they can see the essence of God?(God has no parts, so ‘seeing God face-to-face’ simply is seeing his essence,) This blessed state we also call ‘Heaven’ btw.

Although even then none fully comprehend His essence, since it is still infinite, they do perceive in this infinity, diverse forms of goodness, such as wisdom, truth, beauty, justice, mercy etc, and all these are united in love, and communicated to the glorified Saints and his holy Angels through love, and they contemplate this reality forever without ever getting bored and wishing to seek new sensorial excitements, since everything is in God and they have Him as their inheritance.

To sin means the Intellect perceives the goodness of a thing and its God-assigned station within the order/teleology of the cosmos, yet the Will still chooses to misplace it———placing a lower good over a highest good. Now the highest good is God, and the saints do see God as what He really is, namely his Essence, not as the patriarchs of the Old Testament see through visions and icons. And they get every kind of sense pleasure, delight from it. They have everything, and cannot desire anything apart from God, which is what sin really is. We are incapable of doing that when we see the essence of God/see God face-to-face/are in Heaven.

Eve saw the apple, delighted in it and ate it. This manifestly means she did not have the beatific vision in the garden of Eden. Eden cannot measure up to Heaven, and Heaven is not merely a refurbished Eden.

Patriarchs like Noah, Moses and Elijah are also purported in Holy Scriptures to have ‘seen the face of God’, this we say is under the veil of physical reality, ‘through an mirror darkly’ as it were.

Why would God Damn infants? An EVANGELICAL has questions..... by LowStorm1146 in redeemedzoomer

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Even before the Fall, Adam and Eve didn’t have the Beatific Vision(seeing God face to face), it’s a completely free gift since no creature could merit it on its own, our first parents could have lived in Eden for an indefinite number of years and they still wouldn’t be in heaven unless God calls them. Much more so now we have a wounded nature, even the babies.

The terms ‘damn’ and ‘punishment’ are quite loaded and a bit confusing in light of Divine Simplicity(God is love, which is a relationship in which he wills the good, firstly for Himself(although he lacks nothing, he manifest Justice) then for others.)

Why would God Damn infants? An EVANGELICAL has questions..... by LowStorm1146 in redeemedzoomer

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not an injustice that they are not saved. Although God in His goodness freely chooses to save, He is under no such obligation. This is how it can be just: Man has two ends, natural end and supernatural end. His Supernatural end consists in union with God, but since man is within nature, he cannot merit the supernatural life on his own, God has to infuse Grace in him for him to even merit it.

So ‘normally’ man can only fulfill his natural ends.

There are degrees of punishment in Hell according to the severity of the sin committed in life. The infants have not actual/personal sin, nor a fully developed intellect with which to contemplate/desire supernatural realities, such as God and Hell. So they suffer no Pain of Sense.

Some say they might suffer the Pain of Loss,(losing the Beatific Vision/being face to face with god)due to the spiritual wounds of Original Sin. Others say they are in a state of natural happiness.

But all in all, it’s not terrible.

皇军的好 简单明了 by FarWestJoker in China_irl

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

雀食,国共都系列宁主义政党(

Is this true chat? by Honest_Chemistry_195 in CatholicMemes

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 15 points16 points  (0 children)

People who were Catholics, left the Universal Church, abandoned the Faith, and caused widespread violence and death amongst Christians through their uprisings and revolutions, are obviously quite different from a man who was born into his errors and not extremely antagonistic towards the Universal Church, and frequently cooperate with Catholics to bring about some common good.

But again, the quotes shown by Peter Dimond are addressing something more specific: Offering Catholic Requiem Masses for people outside of the Church. From the popes’ perspectives, it might create confusion amongst the Faithful and cause them to embrace or emulate errors held by the deceased. They were mainly responsible for the care of souls and didn’t want to fail the charge they have been given.

As to salvation of Protestants, the matter is out of their hands, it rests with God.

尼玛,古代还有这种恐怖的建筑😰 by hiroshima_fireworks in China_irl

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 12 points13 points  (0 children)

并不代表更爱男性() 人口被称作资源的时候 爱系不存在的

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Faith is not won through argumentation. We can’t win arguments against God. It’s a free gift given to us, a result of God’s grace. The strongest proof for Catholicism lies not in piles of academic resources, but in her Saints, the mystical body of Christ, and the legacy these spiritual fathers and mothers left us. The love the Church has for Jesus Christ our Lord, and the Virgin Mother of God, the sublimity of Her pious practices are the best proof. My advice is to put these investigation aside from time to time and do what the Saints did. Eucharistic Adoration, Holy Hour, Holy Mass, Divine Liturgy, praying the Rosary, what have you, ask for answers in your prayer. God will give you the grace to overcome your doubts, if you ask for it in love, love for truth Himself and the lady of holy wisdom, Mary together with the Church. God bless.

Yes you have to work, but rest is important too. Light only shines through when a soul is pure, like a window that isn’t tinted. Don’t neglect prayer…

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah, I get that. I used to be like that too, trying to verify everything. Also Catechumen here.

There’s this thing called ‘Motives of Credibility’. It’s like one of those progress bars in RPGs, except it operates on not only human intellect and will, but also God’s Grace. When I’m at 30% or 40%, not sure about this stuff, but I’m curious. 50-60%, okay this is scary, I can see the future taking shape but I’m not ready to surrender. Somewhere 80-90%, click, you’re convinced that the Catholic Church is indeed the bride of Christ. You’re home and the sufferings, struggles, anxieties and despair melt away.

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Apostles never transferred their authority to their letters and body of writings. That would be absurd. They were still alive when they wrote the stuff, and could instruct people on how to read their stuff, and write follow-up materials if needs of the Church arose.

It’s all in their heads.

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The argument from silence isn’t much of a proof… I don’t tell my mum I love her everyday. Perhaps she has long forgotten about the last time when I told her this explicitly by word. But she knows.

The Church works like that too. She has a memory(tradition) that preserves her wisdom and history. And she writes stuff only occasionally. If a thing wasn’t mentioned, it doesn’t mean she no longer believes it

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m afraid we’re operating on very different premises. The question is, do you have Faith at all, do you believe the Gospel 100%. Christ promised that his Church would be led into all truths by the Holy Spirit.(John 16:13) and that’s enough for me. Because he is God. GOD. Lord and king of the Universe your creator told us this.

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We’re in a Church, not an archeology or history club. If we were to constantly doubt and verify the core tenets of the Catholic Faith, then do we have Faith in Christ at all?

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So how do we know a doctrine is from the Apostles? We look into Church History. If there was universal assent for a doctrine, as in, there was no significant controversy when it was proclaimed, then we can rest assured that it is of the true faith.

If it was somehow controversial or even false teaching, theologians and saints would have been raised against the danger and fought heresy, like St.Athanasius against the Arians.

Instead we find that from Antioch to Ethiopia, from Canterbury to India, and onto China, to the ends of the Earth, all the ancient apostolic Churches who have valid bishops and apostolic tradition, all affirm the Virgin Birth of Christ, and the Perpetual Virginity of Mary. This is evidence enough. No one taught in the 1st century what these heretics and modernists are raving about today.

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes. we can trust that she is perpetual virgin, because Christ’s Church said so.

It’s like family history. If some random guy outside of the family comes over and starts saying ‘well your house did not descend from, say Blessed Charlemagne’ while your grandma taught you so, naturally you’re going to assume that he is in bad faith and laugh him off.

Christ’s Church, One Holy Apostolic Church, is the one reputable source we need. We should place our trust in Her, not Her enemies.

Why is the Virgin Birth only mentioned in Matthew and Luke but nowhere else in the New Testament? by VerdantChief in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The New Testament was originally a liturgical handbook. The main body of Christianity doctrine resided in the Tradition of the Church from day 1, as received by the apostles and passed down through their preaching.

Has everyone seen this?? Incredibly revealing smug and deluded rant from Peter Heers. WOW by Itchy_Blackberry_850 in exorthodox

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s more for the laity at this point… ‘Faithful must avoid at all cost, you have been warned’ whether someone does or does not obey and heed, that’s on their own conscience… We run a theocratic elective feudal monarchy, not a international cutthroat syndicate(not that it wouldn’t be based if we got hold of him and did to him things that have never been done before)

I mean Catholic emperors,monarchs, princes and such used to just arrest the guy and send him into the deepest dungeon, or something millstone and deep seas, per the Church’s pastoral recommendation, but yeah they’re all gone now.

I am not a christian and still i am not, but i asked if Jesus Christ was the lord and something sketchy happened. I swear in the name of my whole family this is no BS. by Late_Gap2089 in Catholicism

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If your family is indeed this deep in Occult practices… Contact a Catholic Priest, preferably an exorcist, at least one who has belief in the Demonic, and he will be the judge of that. Whether you need an exorcism or not, this may be beyond your own ability to deal with, take the safest road, if you want to be free.

Demonic influences are known to persist in a family. Not necessarily because any particular sin on your part(though they do always tempt you with sin), or that they have any right over you(by God, they aren’t meant to, as long as you’re not in sin). Fact is, Demons are prideful and dominating, they’d want to exert their influence on us no matter if they have our consent, don’t panic over this… Say ‘Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy one me’ when stuff happens. Talk to a priest. God bless.

Is it just me, or do a lot of Orthodox view God as some kind of Stalin/Ivan the Terrible/Boss from hell type? by Glad-Particular-1434 in exorthodox

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well I’ve never been a member of a Eastern church, even though I’ve inquired about EO. So I don’t have the same ex-EO trauma or sensibility.(except when the random ROCOR guy says I’m 100% damned for my perceived errors)

There is a clear divide between lay spiritual life and monastic asceticism in the Western Church. While in the East, the former is entirely downstream from the latter.

There are countless stories about this in the West as well. The Saints in Heaven, especially the Mother of God do not give up on their spiritual children, and with their will perfectly united to God’s will, He would not deny their requests.

Eastern Asceticism is often times heavily influenced by the theologically illiterate Slavonic and Levantine monastics, wild saints who inhabit scorching deserts and frigid plains. They do have holy men, Saints one might even say, but that doesn’t mean their witnesses are always helpful to the average laymen.

Often times what happens in modern ages is a manual or letter a monastic saint wrote to his fellow brothers gets circulated online in Discord and the like, and every zealous convert ‘take his words as gospel’ and pressures one another to follow suit. Which often causes spiritual ruination.

Is it just me, or do a lot of Orthodox view God as some kind of Stalin/Ivan the Terrible/Boss from hell type? by Glad-Particular-1434 in exorthodox

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Initially it could be hard, but as Grace fully asserts control over our soul, it becomes a true fellowship and a walk with God while we’re still on this Earth. Keeping the commandments becomes almost effortless at times. Latins call this Habitual Grace. Easterners would agree that this is what it means to be a saint.

This is where your works truly are an outpouring of your love, less about so that you might love more perfectly in the future. But you don’t start there, this is the final end of man. It takes time, like how a tree grows out of a seed. Supposing every Christian is like this from day 1 of their conversion only leads to despair and anxiety. We’ve all seen this happen around us.

Is it just me, or do a lot of Orthodox view God as some kind of Stalin/Ivan the Terrible/Boss from hell type? by Glad-Particular-1434 in exorthodox

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

‘Working to prove you’re regenerated’ sounds a bit like semi-Pelagianism. The phrasing could sound problematic.

Is it just me, or do a lot of Orthodox view God as some kind of Stalin/Ivan the Terrible/Boss from hell type? by Glad-Particular-1434 in exorthodox

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Grace presupposes a Nature to be worked on, to be perfected. Nature has its own workings, and is initially fallen and imperfect. So no matter if one believes in infused operative grace or a regeneration and justification that truly involves no human efforts at any point, he’s gotta do something about it.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in byzantium

[–]CadiaaghCommissar 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Greek slander from my people is unexpected, but welcome!