Replies

If such people die, would they be damned to hell for not being Christian, in your view?

People are not damned to hell for not being Christian.

People are already damned to hell and it's accepting Christ that saves them from going where they belong.

They already deserve hell.

Catholics seem to have this problem with understanding human nature and divine judgment.

We are not going to heaven until we somehow lose it. We are going to hell until we accept Christ and put our trust in Him to save us from that.

So yes, people who have never heard are going to hell, but not because God damns them, but because that it the penalty for the sin they commit.

They're headed there anyway until they're kept from it.

People are not damned to hell for not being Christian. People are already damned to hell and it's accepting Christ that saves them from going where they belong.

Well... all right, but that leaves loads of unanswered questions (e.g. "Can someone "accept Christ" implicitly, by accepting the Law written on their hearts by Jesus, even if they're innocently ignorant of Him, personally?).

They already deserve hell.

Yes, and no. Let me ask, then: are infants (and mentally-impaired adults, such as those with Down's Syndrome) damned to hell if they die before reaching the age where they can "accept Christ"? I'm not asking this as a "gotcha" or thetorical device; I really need to know your views (since I can't assume they're identical with anyone else--not even with the beliefs of the other sola-Scriptura believers on this board).

Catholics seem to have this problem with understanding human nature and divine judgment.

That sounds like a criticism... but it's far too vague to address. Anyone could say the same about anyone else.

So yes, people who have never heard are going to hell, but not because God damns them, but because that it the penalty for the sin they commit. They're headed there anyway until they're kept from it.

Now... can you show me where it say that (explicitly) in Scripture?

[citations of John 3:3-8, John 5:24, John 6:40, John 11:25-26]

How can *HAS eternal life* not mean *has eternal life*?

In this case, you're glossing over the pregnant word "believe", which involves far more than mere mental assent. It also involves obedience (cf. John 3:36), corporal works of mercy (cf. Matthew 25:31-46), and a host of other things.

I could ask, in the same way, how you can think that "This is My Body", "My Flesh is real food", "My Blood is real drink", etc., apparently doesn't mean "This is My Body", etc.

The only way to not read it as it stands is to *interpret* it. Besides, I'm not *interpreting* the Scripture, I'm explaining it. :)

:) Mm-hmm. Dear lady, when you "go beyond what is written" in order to impart its meaning, you are interpreting it (i.e. translating its meaning for those who allegedly do not understand). Every good teacher does that; not only is it neither bad nor forbidden, but it's absolutely necessary.

When people came to Jesus, did He give them a theology exam? Did He demand that they jump through hoops to earn salvation?

Do you see the dark, pejorative words you're using to slant your portrayal, here? I could do the very same thing: "When Jesus came, did He abandon people to millenia of contradictory teaching about Him? Did the Holy Spirit simply not care when two distinct groups of people say 'No, you're wrong, and only if you do what WE suggest, will you be saved'?" You're absolving yourself of all responsibility to prove what you say, here...

Or did He say to them *Your faith has saved you. Go in peace*?

He said that to some people, certainly. Did you notice that their faith was actualized by works (e.g. touching His garments, etc.)?

God wants relationship with His creation, not fear of damnation based performance.

This, from one who believes that non-Christians are damned to hell, even if they were innocently denied the Gospel?

He made salvation simple enough for a child to grasp it and told us that unless we become like little children, we would never enter the kingdom of heaven.

We are to be as INNOCENT as children, yes... but not as ignorant as children. He never said that believing falsehoods about Him was somehow irrelevant and "perfectly safe"; it matters a great deal.

So how does that square with the RCC demanding works?

JESUS demands works... unless you prefer to be a goat. (Cf. Matthew 25)

Many years ago I reached a point of desperation where I finally told God, *If you can straighten out this mess of a life of mine, you can have it. I'll do anything you want, even become a missionary and go to Africa cause I'd rather be happy doing what You want me to, then keep going the way I am.* He took me up on that. Some time later someone was telling me about accepting Christ into my heart and I didn't understand what he meant in the least, but something in my heart was stirred and inside I thought, *THAT'S IT!!! That's what I want.* Then I prayed *Jesus, I don't know what it means to ask You into my heart as an act of will, but I will you in.* Not exactly a *sinner's prayer*, no altar call, it happened at work, but the change was immediate and dramatic. There is nothing else except the fact that I was born again,born spiritually, that could explain the complete change in focus of my entire life. In an instant. I didn't even have to try.

In all seriousness: I'm very happy for you, and what happened to you was a wonderful thing. A personal relationship with Jesus Christ (and with His children) is the whole point of our existence, after all... and I'll be quite honest: many Catholics (at least in the USA, with which I'm most familiar) have no clue about that, and it breaks my heart. But here's where I'll disagree with your notion: you attribute this "rupture" to Catholicism ITSELF, not to a NEGLECT of it, ignorance of it, refusal to implement it, etc. That's where you're mistaken. You're wrong to judge a Church by those members who don't LIVE it. Anything--ANYTHING--needs to be judged on the basis of what happens when it's actually USED. Hammers aren't judged on the word of those who've never hit a nail in their lives; car performance isn't judged on the word of those who insist on filling the gas tank with molasses. The Church should not be judged on the basis of those who--willfully or ignorantly--do not live Her teachings and practices.

In short: you need to make up your mind. You can try to attack the Church for Her TEACHING (in which case, I'll respond with theology--and it'll do no one any good for you to complain about "how the Church is making things complicated", since you'll have started the theology discussion in the first place), or you can try to criticize Her MEMBERS for not living up to the teachings (and I'll join you with full voice, in doing so!); but you cannot waffle between the two, advocating "simple sentimentalism" on one hand while "criticizing the complications and details of theology" on the other.

You know what? I really believe that God doesn't care nearly as much as all the crossed t's and dotted i's of having out theology nailed down, as He cares about a heart that is unreservedly following after Him.

In one sense, that's very true: the whole point of life is to know God, to love Him, to serve Him, and to be forever happy with Him in Heaven. If that was all you were advocating, I probably wouldn't have said "word one" to you about the matter. But you took it upon yourself to attack the Catholic Church (ostensibly because of Her so-called "false teachings"--which is a matter for theology, and not a matter for "resting in the Lord's embrace") and to try to lead people OUT of the Church on that basis... so it sounds odd to hear you now say that the details of religion don't matter, and that one's theology need not be "nailed down". What, are you now welcoming of worship of the Holy Eucharist? Are you indifferent to the veneration shown to the Blessed Virgin Mary? Are you now sanguine about prayers for the dead? If not, then this appeal to "simplity and unimportance of rules" means something quite more than what you've presented, here.

It's HIS responsibility to straighten out people's whacked out theology and He will.

So... why are you not (and I say this as a hypothetical, not as a suggestion) abstaining from theological debate (because that is what you're doing, here) and quietly praying for Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and all others... and letting God sort out the details? (I assure you, I'll never say "no" to prayers of any sort from you--God knows that I need them!) But you exert yourself mightily in the theological cause "against Rome". Why, if your own standards say that you should drop it and leave it to Him?

Re: your final comments (about your fallibility, struggles, trust in God, etc.)... I can only say, "God bless and reward you." It's both beautiful and good, and it's edifying for those who're on the journey with you.