What Heaven is Like

[Gaest]

in the presence of God out of their hate for him;.

Then I must be in the clear, since I do not hate God...

[Neo-Scholastic]

Would a non-believer find enjoyment in hell then? If so, then what's the point of believing?

Hell also has its delights. But those delights diminish eternally, whereas in heaven joy continually increases. To him that has much more shall be given, whereas those that have little, what little they have will be taken away. -Somewhere 1:1

[Thor]

Even Satan "believes in" God, so in this case "belief" or "believer" is meaningless.

Not letting this steaming pile float on by! What is your evidence that "Satan" is real?

In the words of Pope St. Gregory the Great:

"In hell, there will be a fire that cannot be put out, a worm which cannot die, a stench one cannot bear, a darkness one can feel, a scourging by savage hands, with those present despairing of anything good"

And did this Dope ever visit "Hell"? I'm betting no. In that case, how could he possibly know what "Hell" is like? How can he know it even exists?

Through Sacred Scripture and Tradition.

So because a Dope makes a proclamation and someone writes it down, that makes it true?

[Aiza]

^^
St. Gregory the Great speaks from Scripture and Tradition, again. They are upheld as true by the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church, instituted by Christ himself with the Papacy traceable to St. Peter.

You don't have to believe in his Church of course. You may reject it as you please. I am speaking within the context of Christianity, as many of the threads on this forum tend to be (both for better and for worse)

The portion Tegh quoted referred to an "unholy life". According to your "sacred scripture and tradition", being a non-believer is a sin. Unless non-believers have holiness, Tegh's point that an un-believer will have no reason to go to heaven still stands.

No it isn't---it can be, since its grave matter, but sin is more complex than that. Anyone who seeks God with their whole heart and strives to only do goodness can also eventually receive the Beatific Vision. To someone who did not believe in God but still sought him out always, who never lost hope or charity toward all humans, to be united to God at last would be a welcome relief.

All I saw from the OP is lots and lots of ego stroking. Why am I not surprised?
I wouldn't want to be in heaven if this 'heaven' of yours involves stroking gawd's over sized ego. I consider that hell.

Yep, thanks for sort of proving Blessed John Henry Newman's point!

[Gooders1002]

On a side note: my heaven is pretty much earth with religion and everybody is equity on a planetary scale. In Death I want there to be nothing just like sleeping, Without the dreaming part. no heaven or hell, and not worrying about anything. I would be strange if the really was.

[Minimalist]

St. Gregory the Great speaks from Scripture and Tradition, again. They are upheld as true by the Holy Apostolic Catholic Church, instituted by Christ himself with the Papacy traceable to St. Peter.

Bullshit makes the flowers grow.

[Epimethean]

" ... were a man to come hither, who had suffered his mind to grow up in its own way, as nature or chance determined, without any deliberate habitual effort after truth and purity, he would find no real pleasure here, but would soon get weary of the place;"

What a royal load of hooey. "Without any deliberate effort after truth or purity?"

Science is the pursuit of truth. Religion is pretending to know what truth is.

Extra vomit sauce on this pretentious steaming turd. I would love to see Mark Twain rewrite that pukefest. He would do it honestly.

[Anomalocaris]

This meditation is from the first sermon of His Eminence Blessed John Henry Newman ("Holiness Necessary for Future Blessedness"), given when he was only 25 years old, which made me think a bit of some of the points mentioned in this forum. Hopefully it doesn't come off as too preachy, rather I think its just thoughtful:

....even supposing a man of unholy life were suffered to enter heaven, he would not be happy there; so that it would be no mercy to permit him to enter....

Supposing, then, instead of it being said that no irreligious man could serve and attend on God in heaven (or see Him, as the text expresses it), we were told that no irreligious man could worship, or spiritually see Him in church; should we not at once perceive the meaning of the doctrine? viz. that, were a man to come hither, who had suffered his mind to grow up in its own way, as nature or chance determined, without any deliberate habitual effort after truth and purity, he would find no real pleasure here, but would soon get weary of the place; because, in this house of God, he would hear only of that one subject which he cared little or nothing about, and nothing at all of those things which excited his hopes and fears, his sympathies and energies. If then a man without religion (supposing it possible) were admitted into heaven, doubtless he would sustain a great disappointment. Before, indeed, he fancied that he could be happy there; but when he arrived there, he would find no discourse but that which he had shunned on earth, no pursuits but those he had disliked or despised, nothing which bound him to aught else in the universe, and made him feel at home, nothing which he could enter into and rest upon. He would perceive himself to be an isolated being, cut away by Supreme Power from those objects which were still entwined around his heart. Nay, he would be in the presence of that Supreme Power, whom he never on earth could bring himself steadily to think upon, and whom now he regarded only as the destroyer of all that was precious and dear to him. Ah! he could not bear the face of the Living God; the Holy God would be no object of joy to him. "Let us alone! What have we to do with thee?" is the sole thought and desire of unclean souls, even while they acknowledge His majesty. None but the holy can look upon the Holy One; without holiness no man can endure to see the Lord.

This "Blessed Eminence" is the same catholic fuck who said it was better form the catholic church's point of view for a billion people to starve to death in the "extremest" agony than for just a single soul to sin in the view of the catholic church.

Your fucking criminal catholic church is currently headed by a pope who wants to make this inhuman "Blessed Eminence" a "saint", you stupid ignorant diluded preachy sanctimonious catholic cunt.

[libalchris]

---

This meditation is from the first sermon of His Eminence Blessed John Henry Newman ("Holiness Necessary for Future Blessedness"), given when he was only 25 years old, which made me think a bit of some of the points mentioned in this forum. Hopefully it doesn't come off as too preachy, rather I think its just thoughtful:

....even supposing a man of unholy life were suffered to enter heaven, he would not be happy there; so that it would be no mercy to permit him to enter....

Supposing, then, instead of it being said that no irreligious man could serve and attend on God in heaven (or see Him, as the text expresses it), we were told that no irreligious man could worship, or spiritually see Him in church; should we not at once perceive the meaning of the doctrine? viz. that, were a man to come hither, who had suffered his mind to grow up in its own way, as nature or chance determined, without any deliberate habitual effort after truth and purity, he would find no real pleasure here, but would soon get weary of the place; because, in this house of God, he would hear only of that one subject which he cared little or nothing about, and nothing at all of those things which excited his hopes and fears, his sympathies and energies. If then a man without religion (supposing it possible) were admitted into heaven, doubtless he would sustain a great disappointment. Before, indeed, he fancied that he could be happy there; but when he arrived there, he would find no discourse but that which he had shunned on earth, no pursuits but those he had disliked or despised, nothing which bound him to aught else in the universe, and made him feel at home, nothing which he could enter into and rest upon. He would perceive himself to be an isolated being, cut away by Supreme Power from those objects which were still entwined around his heart. Nay, he would be in the presence of that Supreme Power, whom he never on earth could bring himself steadily to think upon, and whom now he regarded only as the destroyer of all that was precious and dear to him. Ah! he could not bear the face of the Living God; the Holy God would be no object of joy to him. "Let us alone! What have we to do with thee?" is the sole thought and desire of unclean souls, even while they acknowledge His majesty. None but the holy can look upon the Holy One; without holiness no man can endure to see the Lord.

---

You're right, it's so merciful of God to send us to eternal hell-fire and suffering than to let us get bored forever in heaven

I've heard the argument before, and let me say it made A LOT more sense in my old religion, where they didn't believe in hell, they believed that at the end of times the unsaved were killed and stayed dead. That sounds a little more merciful.

[fuckass365]

What Heaven is like