The logical response to the dogma of eternal hell (part I)
Christians today more than ever, when it deals with the devil and hell, will inevitably pose reasonable questions that undermines that vision yet of medieval Christianity, which acknowledges the presence within it of the alleged spiritual being (Lucifer), who became evil because he wanted to be equal to God and God himself would have fallen into hell. But even more problem involves the issue of hell forever. Republic was reported long ago on a sentence of the Pope who said: "He who sins and repent not end up in hell, which is eternal." Apart from the fact that an expression so hard, that would seem to put the pope himself away from this possibility of a failure of his life, is an indication of poor human sensitivity from those who should care about the dignity of exaltation ' man, the thing that most offends you say with a real presence that dogmatic truth is not so. These statements border on plagiarism and ruin the consciences already starting from a very young age. In My experience of listening to children, young people, graduates or not, I saw their great discomfort rather than a negative theology, founded on terror and that leads them to move away from the Christian community. The questions that I will soon try to interpret the feelings of these young people who have a very open mind and reject categorically the Christian faith to them to say "dark, full of pitfalls and into your soul just sadness." In our analysis of this very sensitive issue, let us ask now the logical question is, suppose for a moment, even absurdly, that there is that infamous Lucifer which we have already demonstrated the lack of it. We will explain una volta per tutte l’infondatezza, prima logica e poi teologica, dell’esistenza dell’inferno e, di conseguenza, anche di questo inquietante personaggio che lo abiterebbe. Chiediamoci innanzitutto: Come può esistere un luogo di dannazione eterna per un angelo ribelle a Dio? Se Dio l’ha destinato all’inferno, come ci afferma la teologia cattolica (solo perché questo angelo voleva essere come Dio), significa che c’era un inferno già esistente? Ma può Dio aver creato un inferno eterno prima che Lucifero peccasse? Dio non può creare una realtà negativa. Allora dovremmo ipotizzare che possa esistere un inferno “al di fuori” di Dio? Ma nei confronti di Dio, si può dire che there is an "inside" and an "outside"? So God is the All? Or is that the rebellion of the angel (Lucifer) to generate a hell? But can a sin, even if large, against God, to create an eternal hell? Can a sin committed by an angel, which is still a creature "over" and "imperfect", to create a place of punishment "infinity", infinite as the punishment is "eternal", and also infinite? There is too much disparity between the offense committed (Lucifer is still a creature) and the eternal punishment result of such negligence? If we touch now the subject of freedom on which based around Christianity, in reference to man's faith as a response "FREE" to God that the questions, we will see that questions arise to which no response is received and understand everything. Let's see: If God gave freedom to his creatures, so they can freely decide to rebel against God but also to obey, as it is possible that, after only a rebellion against the Creator, the rebel angel no longer has the opportunity to repent to return to God? Maybe God took away the rebel angel blessings of liberty, after they sinned? But then God first makes a gift of his freedom to a creature and then takes it from him? That being the case, then, the Creator changes in her feelings to the rebellious creature? But if so, we too are doomed when we commit a grave offense? Catholic theology does not assures us, however, that every sin can follow repentance and repentance? If both things are true, then God uses two weights and two measures, condemning the rebel angel hell and forgiving, however, the man who repents? It 'possible that man should repent and not Lucifer? This means that Lucifer is no longer free to adhere to God, after having committed a sin of rebellion against Him? But if this is true, and Lucifer is deprived of the freedom to repent, is not reduced, Lucifer himself, for an automaton without freedom? At this point can no longer be called "creation", because what characterizes the state of creature it is "freedom." Now if Lucifer no longer has the freedom to repent, how does he still have the freedom of men groped? So if this is true, he is subject to God, but is subject to God because if deprived of his liberty and can not, for the same reason, the man groped by the man who is tempted? Maybe God? Let us explain: The freedom, in a creature, that allows one to itself, to have the power to do good and evil to the same extent. If God deprives him of the freedom of being able to return to Him repentant, driving them to hell which is eternal, it will mean that Lucifer will not be able to do good, but then can not do evil even if it is true that being free means being able to freely choose good or evil! Against this backdrop, how can we still say that he tries to hurt the man and, more importantly, it has a chance to have a man? If Lucifer can not do anything, good or evil, because deprived of his liberty, the man who is trying? Maybe God? Impossible. Perhaps God, using Lucifer reduced to puppet eseguitrice orders from God? So God is a tyrant? And the figure of the Father merciful end is presented to us by Jesus? Jesus, after all, he lied to us the Father? Or Jesus showed us a mercy that was hers alone and not the vote of the Father? We realize that the more we move forward in the applications and the more you hunt down a blind alley? If this were not enough, I refer you to the second part, in the next article.
Figliodeltuono
0 comments:
Post a Comment