Pope Francis assures atheists: You don’t have to believe in God to go to heaven

For hundreds of years the church has maintained its control, by being the only ticket to God.

Now faced with loosing that control (Catholics are waking up to the truth) they play God and decide every one is saved. I feel sorry for the masses who gave their power, money etc. to the catholic church only to find out, they could have just followed their conscience.

Or does this Pope have a God Complex????

reply to post by adjensen


I see the phrase "surviving documents" on that web page. Which leads me to ask a very important question: if they had wanted to erase evidence of certain discussions which might implicate some very important figures, or worse, ruin everything they were trying to do in that council...how hard would it be to destroy the documents? How do we know that this information is ALL of the information available? How do we know they didn't run interference even back when those documents were still new? If they had, we would never know. For all we know, there were several more documents that all disappeared in a mysterious fire that was hushed up, or certain meetings were never even recorded.

If you wanna catch a politician, you gotta think like one. And I'm thinking there's any number of ways to make a nefarious agenda look perfectly innocent - especially if investigations don't start until over 1,000 years after the fact.

From my understanding of Christian theology, he is sort of right, and sort of wrong. The claim that the Christian God is supposed to be infinitely forgiving is true, except in one area, which is the area the pope is referring to. God will forgive those who do not believe, but ONLY if they repent and accept Jesus Christ as their Savior. Whether or not it is too late once one dies is up for debate, and my personal opinion is that YES, it is too late.

I mean there are those who would say that God is not forgiving if he would condemn a non-believer to hell for not believing, but is it really God's fault in the first place? Of course it is not. The Bible explicitly states however that God does make a distinction between two types of non-believers. First, there are those who have never heard the Word of God. Those people will have more leeway than the other type of non-believer, which is someone who has heard the Word of God, understands it somewhat, and openly rejects it. Those people can still be saved by accepting Christ, from the Christian viewpoint.

Oh, but there is one more type of non-believer. This is someone who not only openly rejects the Word of God, but who also fights against God and His doctrines, attempting to draw others away from the faith. These types of people can still be saved as well, but I am not certain as to whether it is the same. So there is some distinction between those who have never heard the Word of God, and those who reject it. It will be worse for the latter, as the Bible states.

It is my personal belief that Heaven contains either multiple levels, or there are ranks to be had in Heaven. The latter is suggested by Jesus himself, when he talks about someone being greater than someone else in Heaven. But throughout the New Testament there are claims about God judging people based on their faith, not their works, but it is clearly stated that a person's works factor into the formula in some manner. And while good works are not necessarily obligatory for entry into Heaven, those who follow Christian doctrine WILL do good works, because good works go hand in hand with these teachings.

SadistNocturne

Thank you for the respect! Please accept mine as well.

However, if I was incorrect in my retelling of the Nicene Council, I am willing to accept that.

That is what I was taught of the Nicene Council. If I am incorrect, please point me to the appropriate sources, and I will review them.

- SN

Thanks for replying.

Wikipedia has a decent summary. Here's a link: en.wikipedia.org...

Here is a more in depth look: www.fordham.edu...

Here is another in depth look: mb-soft.com...

Here is a link to English translations of the documents issued from the Council: www.newadvent.org...

I hope that helps.

Eric


EDIT: I see that Adjensen has once again beaten me to it and replied. If you have any questions not covered in the links, lmk and I'll see if I can get reasonable resources for you.

AfterInfinity
I see the phrase "surviving documents" on that web page. Which leads me to ask a very important question: if they had wanted to erase evidence of certain discussions which might implicate some very important figures, or worse, ruin everything they were trying to do in that council...how hard would it be to destroy the documents?

No offense, but that is a completely fruitless argument. The situation is that there is no evidence of an editing of the Bible at the Council of Nicea. To say that there might have been some but it was redacted or somehow altered is as meaningful as saying that they also might have had discussions about Angels being aliens, the future invention of football and the best way to cook ribs (6 hours at 225 over hardwood charcoal, btw).

Unless there is some evidence, to blindly speculate is meaningless (unless you're the author of poorly written fiction like Dan Brown and you're making a buck off it). It's about as productive as staring at clouds and imagining that one looks like a cow and another hand.

Eric

misskat1
For hundreds of years the church has maintained its control, by being the only ticket to God.

Now faced with loosing that control (Catholics are waking up to the truth) they play God and decide every one is saved. I feel sorry for the masses who gave their power, money etc. to the catholic church only to find out, they could have just followed their conscience.

Or does this Pope have a God Complex????

misskat,


We are in the end times, the faith is weak and very little true catechesis for the last fifty years. You need more than "conscience" to make it to Heaven. Sin causes one's conscience to be disordered.

Everyone in the world needs God's grace, His presence to be good. My advise is pray, God will send you the needed grace. Ask Him for the grace to believe. The fullness of God's revelation and His grace is
found only in the Church He established, Roman Catholicism.

You probably do not believe me now but when it happens, it could happen next year, God's divine awakening
or as Catholics know it, the Great Warning will convince you. God is going to show the entire world personally. Free will, you can still say no but I have a feeling you won't misskat.

Mark "control" off the list of objections. Man-made religion and THE faith (Roman Catholicism) controls
no one. You aren't buying Catholicism right now. Seee...even when God shows you, it will still be the gift of free
will.


love and God bless you,


colbe

reply to post by colbe

Everyone in the world needs God's grace, His presence to be good.

Excuse me, but bullcrap. Pure and utter bullcrap. I am an atheist and I am still a good person. I am living proof that you are wrong.

Ask Him for the grace to believe.

Why would we need the grace to believe if he's real? We don't need grace to believe in gravity or the sun. So why do we need grace to believe in your god unless he's not real?

wrabbit2000
What does it MEAN to be Catholic anymore?

It means that Religion has to embrace the fact that people have different beliefs.

Im just glad they are not restarting the Inquisition up again. The Church has come along way.



S&F

Maybe the pope knows that the point of death to ascension to spiritual life can be undercut by devourers of spiritual energy? Guilt may draw them closer to you as you are dying?

reply to post by colbe


Thank you for your comment. I am a 50+ year Christian.

I have a hard time seeing the Catholic Hierarchy and the Papacy as anything except the Demonic Headquarters for the End Times. I don't include the beautiful people within the local congregations. I am speaking only of the Hierarchy.

The biblical God will judge peoples hearts and actions, not their religion. But, it also says that "you would know mine by their fruits". I realize the church would like everyone to forget the Inquisition, the priest that "Prey" on kids instead of "Pray" for them, the churches massive wealth, while their people are hungry and poverty stricken. The list is too long to list!!!!

The bible says you aren't allowed to take away or add to the teachings, yet they still advocate their priests remain single. They are the one's that decided which books would be allowed in the Cannon of Scripture, excluding important books like Enoch, Jubilee, etc etc. Any biblical teachings that didn't conform to what they wanted to be the truth, were left out. Only the books that agreed with them and kept them in control were allowed to become a part of the "Cannon of Scripture" that most Christians use today.

I disagree, its all about control. I will change my mind, when I see Rome sell off its Wealth and feed her people, Open their ancient library for people to know the historical truths hidden there, take an active role in rooting out and imprisoning the priests that violate the people in their church. Maybe even as far as public humiliation, flogging, or hanging.

Until then, I will see the catholic hierarchy for what it is. Those of us on the outside of the Catholic Church have their eyes wide open, and are disgusted, and repulsed by their actions.

So, are they right today, regarding being saved, or were they right last week when they had a different view???
Were they right during the inquisition?? Are they right to hold wealth while people die of starvation?? If I were catholic, I would leave the church, just because I wouldn't want the hierarchy's blood on my hands.

reply to post by misskat1

The bible says you aren't allowed to take away or add to the teachings, yet they still advocate their priests remain single.

What does that have to do with anything? Priests being single is a policy, it isn't doctrine, and if you think that every decision anyone ever makes has to be backed up with scripture, you must have a pretty hard time getting through life.

They are the one's that decided which books would be allowed in the Cannon of Scripture, excluding important books like Enoch, Jubilee, etc etc. Any biblical teachings that didn't conform to what they wanted to be the truth, were left out.

Why would the Catholic church, 1800 years ago, include books that weren't Christian? They had valid reasons for not including the stuff that weren't declared Canonical, even when what was rejected WAS something that they agreed with (like the letters of the early church fathers.) The Book of Enoch isn't a part of Jewish canonical scripture, why would it be a part of Christian?

The Old Testament is, essentially, the Greek Septuagint (the version of the Hebrew Bible that Jesus and the Apostles likely used,) and the New Testament books are the surviving writings that met this criteria: they had to have a direct Apostolic connection; they had to be in general circulation and in use by most Christian churches; and they had to be in harmony with the rest of accepted scripture, including the Old Testament.

Why aren't the Book of Enoch, the Apocalypse of Peter or the Gospel of Thomas included in the Christian Bible? Because they failed to meet those criteria.

reply to post by covertpanther


you should apply to be a writer for the Onion.
XD

reply to post by adjensen
[more

I used the priest policy as an example of Catholic Control, exerted over the people who have taken responsibility as Men of God, teachers and protectors of the faith. This unnatural policy, may have contributed to "preying" on children. I don't choose to be a part of a religion that makes unnatural policies. These policies are laws within the church, and you cant become a married priest. (that I know of)

The book of Enoch was written by the great grandfather of Noah, he was the grandson of Adam and Eve. And is in my opinion one of the most important ancient spiritual writings. The other books you mentioned were Apostolic, written by Apostles. No they didn't agree with Canon of Scripture. But, that should have been left for seekers to make their own conclusions. How could the church control the masses, if they had different views?? The book of Enoch tells a different tale, of the Watchers and creation. The lost Books of Adam and Eve, were very enlightening. Read what Enoch says about Noah's birth!!!

In my opinion, Enochs version, is very much like the ancient Sumerian Texts. Although I believe in God. I also believe there is more truth in the Ancient Texts than what is available in our modern bible.

The books you mentioned were all found in the Qumran Caves. I have a hard time believing the Essenes would devote their lives to copying and protecting these books if they weren't important. Personally, I would believe the Essenes view on God, way before I would believe the Catholic View.

However, everyone needs to create their own belief's. Part of that is to read the ancient writings. Don't forget the men who brought us the inquisition, also gave us our modern bible. Do you really think they care about the truth? Do you really think they care about the masses?

A great place to find ancient texts is sacred-texts.com

misskat1
But, it also says that "you would know mine by their fruits". I realize the church would like everyone to forget the Inquisition, the priest that "Prey" on kids instead of "Pray" for them, the churches massive wealth, while their people are hungry and poverty stricken. The list is too long to list!!!!

Assuming that your assessment is correct, are those Her only 'fruits'? What about the hospitals, hospices, food banks, soup kitchens, schools, prison outreach and other charitable endeavors?

I will change my mind, when I see Rome sell off its Wealth and feed her people, Open their ancient library for people to know the historical truths hidden there, take an active role in rooting out and imprisoning the priests that violate the people in their church. Maybe even as far as public humiliation, flogging, or hanging.

How much wealth do you think that the Church has? They have an operating budget less than some universities. Many of the collections of art generate money and are a net positive. Presumably some of that extra funds things like medical research and orphanages. What do you think would be a reasonable amount of money for the Church to have, how much do you believe it has and why?

The Vatican library is (and has been) open to the public in large part and the areas that are not open to the public are open to credentialed scholars. What is it that you are specifically referring to here?

I agree w/ you about predatory members of the clergy. They have taken action and I believe that this Pope will be more aggressive in that area, but not enough has been done. Not even close.

Eric

misskat1
reply to post by adjensen
[more

I used the priest policy as an example of Catholic Control, exerted over the people who have taken responsibility as Men of God, teachers and protectors of the faith. This unnatural policy, may have contributed to "preying" on children. I don't choose to be a part of a religion that makes unnatural policies. These policies are laws within the church, and you cant become a married priest. (that I know of)

Two quick notes:

1) Under certain circumstances, you can be a married RC priest.

2) Celibacy does not lead to pedophilia.


Eric

misskat1
reply to post by adjensen
[more

I used the priest policy as an example of Catholic Control, exerted over the people who have taken responsibility as Men of God, teachers and protectors of the faith. This unnatural policy, may have contributed to "preying" on children.

That is an absolutely ludicrous conclusion -- do you not think that there are married pedophiles? According to this page, 77% of pedophiles are married or once were.

The book of Enoch was written by the great grandfather of Noah, he was the grandson of Adam and Eve. And is in my opinion one of the most important ancient spiritual writings. The other books you mentioned were Apostolic, written by Apostles. No they didn't agree with Canon of Scripture. But, that should have been left for seekers to make their own conclusions.

< snip >

The books you mentioned were all found in the Qumran Caves.

No, they were not -- the texts in Qumran are Jewish, not Christian. The Apocalypse of Peter is an early Christian document, which was almost certainly not written by Peter and which was originally part of the Christian canon, but was eventually cut because it was tangentially against some other scripture (plus, it's a pretty creepy book.) The Gospel of Thomas was not written by the Apostle Thomas, but rather is a Gnostic Christian book from the middle of the Second Century -- in other words, it is a holy text from another religion, you might as well complain that the Bible holds no Hindu or Islamic books, as well.

I have a hard time believing the Essenes would devote their lives to copying and protecting these books if they weren't important. Personally, I would believe the Essenes view on God, way before I would believe the Catholic View.

You do realize that the Essenes were Jewish extremists, right? They didn't just uphold the Law of the Old Testament, they were slavishly devoted to it, to the point of fasting before the Sabbath because they thought it was a sin to go to the bathroom on the Sabbath.

I would suggest that you spend some time studying these things before putting yourself out there as an expert on what teaching is right and what teaching is wrong.

For many Christians it comes down to if you don't believe Jesus is God and Jesus died for you,and you don't "repent" of your sins,and do good works,and ask forgiveness, and,and,and...(it varies greatly) you aren't saved/forgiven and will spend eternity in the punishment of hell or be annihilated.

There is no worse consequence than this.Any merciful,just person would not wish this on the most malignantly evil person in existence..Yet billions believe this whole heartily and express this passionlessly ...why..because it is so much easier when they believe THEY aren't going to hell.They even say they have scripture "proof"but the fact is scriptures doesn't support the eternal punishment of hell. The hell doctrine has to be extrapolated to have any form at all and even then it makes no sense.First there are only 4 words translated hell.

Sheol =Hebrew for the grave..the realm of the dead,,,the realm of imperception
Hades=The Greek translation and same meaning as Sheol
Gehenna=The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the "valley of the son of Hinnom,also what was the burning garbage dump outside of Jerusalem
Tartarus=it is part of Greek mythology called the deep abyss.The noun it is not used but is tartaroo (ταρταρόω, "throw to Tartarus".That is closer to the Christian definition of hell used only once by Peter and it was not for men .

Those definitions alone should cause anyone intellectually honest to investigate what hell was translated from and really is.Yet I have never seen one person recant they just recite the same rhetoric with variations completely denying the fact that the definition is not the same.If you start from false premise(terminology) everything will be tainted.

That isn't even the best evidence.Even the many that say they don't believe in God have one common "common sense" reason....if there is a "God" they would not do that.They intuitively "know" this is just wrong....very very wrong so much so the risk "going there" because it is so ludicrous.

If they express that to a hell believer they are almost always immediately condemned then the Christians wonders ....why the unbeliever doesn't believe in God?The answer is so obvious but they fail to see. I am not suggesting that is only reason why someone wouldn't believe in a God however the point is Christians give them zero reason to believe.Paul didn't say for naught

For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you, as it is written.

I've heard many a Christian say Jesus saving from hell is "the good news!!Since Jesus/God is also the one sending them there it makes no sense but the hell believers can't see the common sense logic.The inequivocabile fact is Yahoshua IS saving/delivering ALL of mankind... but not from the eternal punishment of hell!! but from the valley of the shadow of death..the physical realm....and as Buzz Lightyear says ... and to infinity and beyond.It is an infinite process not an event.No one is "saved" "past tense" yet or ever will be.It is Always a work in progress.....LIFE!


I am positive the religious will not recant on being wrong...how can they ....then they may be wrong about EVERYTHING!!..and that just can't be because... Jesus saved them!It is very poor circular logic that gets twisted every way but straight.There is a false doctrine answer for everything they don't "believe" in.I've never met a Christian who ever admits they are wrong about religion and if they do it is ALWAYS followed closely by a BIG "but"...

They are missing the most basic premise.The reason Jesus "saves them is because..they are WRONG.....they are so wrong they don't even know how wrong.It is about as wrong as anyone could be.They have indicted God and made him the worse criminal ever....as a quadrillion cubed worse than all the evil men that have ever existed!! If he sentenced one person to 10 minutes of the kind of torture the hell believers prescribe to he is a monster with no match.

Hell is the most vile heinous doctrine to ever be believed by man as a character assassination of Gods nature(name)...Spirit/Life.Yahoshua clearly stated what that meant.Blasphemy of the Spirit will NOT be forgiven in this age (the physical age) nor the one to come.That is how serious an offense it is.Yet billions believe it with all their heart and vehemently approve of it being "just"...it is most assuredly not the Good news in any form.
I don't condemn anyone that believes it.Neither does God.He will repent them(change them).They falsely believe they are "forgiven" their sins as a pardon of guilt.That is another VERY wrong premise.EVERYONE is 100% accountable for their guilt There are no pardons.Forgiveness is "being" freed from bondage...That is salvation.

The fact is hell believers couldn't be more wrong about the most important thing there is...Yahoshua God IS salvation.They have denied the savior and spit in his face while saying Lord Lord but didn't we do many great works in YOUR name.

They are wrong.The pope is wrong..... even with a move away from the blanket condemnation of "the heathens".Things like this are based in common sense.It is Gods nature(name) to save/deliver ..everything and everyone.The only one making a choice is God..and regardless of the many are called consternation GOD has chosen everyone...that's the Good News.

reply to post by wrabbit2000


It's what i've always said, religious people who follow organised faiths have always tried to insinuate that if you don't follow a God, or a religious movement of one sort or another, then that equals you being a bad person.

It doesn't mean anything or the sort.

Not believing in a god or following a religion has nothing to do with goodness or evil..athiests, agnostics, people following alternative faiths are not automatically bad or evil, they are just as good OR bad as religious people, but simply without the shield of religious piety to cover their mistakes or failings.

We're all Human, we're all fallable and we all make mistakes regardless of following a religion, believing in a deity or not. We also all love our families, our partners or spouses, our children and dependents..we 'non believers' (in whatever form that takes) are just as 'holy' and good as someone who does believe...and now this Pope has finally admitted as much.

He's basically saying, "If you're a good person, live your life in service to your family and to others, don't deliberately cause harm to people and have a normal conscience when we make mistakes...then that is all that matters..being a relatively good Human being regardless of faith or lack of faith.

reply to post by Rex282

Although I partly agree with you
The official story is that Christian Church believes in the existence of hell, there are paintings, representations, everywhere, even in the most old (byzantine) churches
They may have taken the idea from previous believes but they added the concept of the home of Satan and deamons and evil and torture, suffering and boiling water and fire! etc.

You see the organized church needed something to scare and spread fear so they can convert followers, believers and gain power having in mind the establishment of the new religion-movement in Rome.
They blamed random misfortune, plagues and bad luck to the ''satanic'' way of life of pagans and their ''satanic'' worhips , temples etc. thats way they destroyed everything the ancients left us(temples, books, art).

Here are very few words of what early christians did (we would need 10 books to get the full idea):

As soon as Christianity was legal (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. ---Pagan priests were killed.

Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.

Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.

Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as "temple destroyer." [DA468]
Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]

Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]

According to Christian chroniclers he "followed meticulously all Christian teachings..."
In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.

In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]
The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a
hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
[DO19-25]

All these and many many more were ''blessed'' by the Church back then, (some of the torturers are even called saint's by the orthodox church), they just, don't talk about them anymore.


Satan seems like a nun compared to the fanatic followers of the God

Dr1Akula
reply to post by Rex282

 

Although I partly agree with you
The official story is that Christian Church believes in the existence of hell, there are paintings, representations, everywhere, even in the most old (byzantine) churches
They may have taken the idea from previous believes but they added the concept of the home of Satan and deamons and evil and torture, suffering and boiling water and fire! etc.

You see the organized church needed something to scare and spread fear so they can convert followers, believers and gain power having in mind the establishment of the new religion-movement in Rome.
They blamed random misfortune, plagues and bad luck to the ''satanic'' way of life of pagans and their ''satanic'' worhips , temples etc. thats way they destroyed everything the ancients left us(temples, books, art).

Here are very few words of what early christians did (we would need 10 books to get the full idea):

As soon as Christianity was legal (315), more and more pagan temples were destroyed by Christian mob. ---Pagan priests were killed.

Between 315 and 6th century thousands of pagan believers were slain.

Examples of destroyed Temples: the Sanctuary of Aesculap in Aegaea, the Temple of Aphrodite in Golgatha, Aphaka in Lebanon, the Heliopolis.

Christian priests such as Mark of Arethusa or Cyrill of Heliopolis were famous as "temple destroyer." [DA468]
Pagan services became punishable by death in 356. [DA468]

Christian Emperor Theodosius (408-450) even had children executed, because they had been playing with remains of pagan statues. [DA469]

According to Christian chroniclers he "followed meticulously all Christian teachings..."
In 6th century pagans were declared void of all rights.

In the early fourth century the philosopher Sopatros was executed on demand of Christian authorities. [DA466]
The world famous female philosopher Hypatia of Alexandria was torn to pieces with glass fragments by a
hysterical Christian mob led by a Christian minister named Peter, in a church, in 415.
[DO19-25]

All these and many many more were ''blessed'' by the Church back then, (some of the torturers are even called saint's by the orthodox church), they just, don't talk about them anymore.


Satan seems like a nun compared to the fanatic followers of the God

Dr,

You are following the wrong person!!! D.M. Murdock is a big fat atheist. She has given herself
some strange new name that begins with A.

Oh my, believe, it is obvious, for 2000 years, all the miraculous points to Jesus Christ.

Science has tested many of the famous miracles, no answers, the answers are higher, a mystery but not really, God is trying to get your attention with every miracle.

Pray, the more you speak to God, the more you want to speak to God...meaning the more you want
to pray.


God bless you and love,


colbe