A JUDAS TYPE OF REPENTANCE

Rex · Jul 15, 2013

I'd like to offer a different perspective, For those of you that may have found that the OT was a shadow of the things to come.

The story of Joesph and his brothers, there are interesting parallels in Gen 45 to the last supper like the cup that Joesph drank from, Joesph shared the food from his table with his brothers but mostly Benjamin, "Christ and John" All leading up to Joesph revealing himself to his brothers after dinner. Just as Christ revealed himself after he had risen from the tomb.

Now If the bible is true, and If you haven't guessed by now Joesph was a type of Christ and he had 11 brothers not 12.
Just as Christ had 11 disciples not 12.

And Peter
Acts 1:16-25 ESV

“Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry.” (Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) “For it is written in the Book of Psalms, “‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and “‘Let another take his office.’ ...

If what was written is true in Gen 45 as a shadow of the things to come in Christ there will never be 12 brothers.
But Peter being the fixer leader that he is is going to fix the problem before receiving the gift of the HS.
And the only thing we read about Mathis is that the lot fell to him.

Just something else to think about along with Joesph and his 11 brothers.

So that the scriptures might be fulfilled in Him

Selene · Jul 15, 2013

This Vale Of Tears said:
I should point out something that nearly everyone misses when talking about Judas Iscariot. Jesus said of him, "Woe to that man by whom (the son of man) is betrayed. It would be better for that man if he had never been born! While I don't go around saying who's in heaven and who's in hell, I can say confidently that Judas was damned because any other fate would make meaningless what Jesus said about him. Don't expect to see him in heaven, you'll be quite disappointed.

While it's true that scripture says that Judas would be better off if he had never been born....this does not mean that he is in Hell. It simply means that his betrayal was a very grave sin......so grave that "it would be better if he had never been born." Scripture also says that Judas went to his own place. The Holy Bible does not specify where that place is. (See Acts 1:25).

In the past, the Catholic Church would not give Mass to those who committed suicide nor bury them on sacred ground blessed by the Church because they thought they were already in Hell. And naturally, one cannot pray for those already in Hell. The Church still believes and teaches that suicide is a grave sin because it is the murder of oneself. So, this teaching has not changed and can never be changed.

However, today the Catholic Church cannot judge whether the person who committed suicide is in Heaven or Hell because we don't know what he/she thought in the final second of their life. The same can be said of Judas Iscariot. Today, Mass is held even for those who committed suicide and buried on blessed ground. Today, we pray for those who committed suicide. This is what has changed today.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

aspen · Jul 15, 2013

The correct response to Judas' betrayal is 'but for the grace of God, there go I'

Selene · Jul 15, 2013

In the beginning, we can see that Judas was corrupted when he betrayed our Lord, but towards the end, the Bible did say that there was some kind of repentance. In other words, Judas regretted and was sorrowful for what he did. He recognized that what he did was wrong and even returned the money. Then he went away anguish. The Bible does teach that we should repent when we sin. We should be sorrowful and feel bad over the sins we committed. Unfortunately, Judas did not give himself the opportunity to find Jesus' love for him on earth. So, we really don't know where Judas is.

What we do know, however, is that Judas Iscariot is still considered an Apostle chosen by Christ. It was not Christ who made the mistake in choosing Judas. It was Judas who made the mistake in committing suicide. If Judas had not chosen to commit suicide, he would be sent out like the rest of the Apostles. The Bible says that Judas' ministry and apostleship continued on with Mathias when he was chosen by lot to replace Judas. So, the apostleship of Judas Iscariot did not die.

This Vale Of Tears · Jul 17, 2013

aspen2 said:
The correct response to Judas' betrayal is 'but for the grace of God, there go I'

I disagree. It's a purely Calvinist notion that people are delegated to reprobation except for the special intervention of God. Judas made free will decisions beginning from when he stole from the money box. His greed and covetousness came to a climax in the betrayal of Christ, but he had been working up to that. This isn't leprosy or any other affliction that we can thank God we've been spared from. Our decisions come from our inner desires and aren't imposed by any outside force.

Selene said:
While it's true that scripture says that Judas would be better off if he had never been born....this does not mean that he is in Hell. It simply means that his betrayal was a very grave sin......so grave that "it would be better if he had never been born." Scripture also says that Judas went to his own place. The Holy Bible does not specify where that place is. (See Acts 1:25).

In the past, the Catholic Church would not give Mass to those who committed suicide nor bury them on sacred ground blessed by the Church because they thought they were already in Hell. And naturally, one cannot pray for those already in Hell. The Church still believes and teaches that suicide is a grave sin because it is the murder of oneself. So, this teaching has not changed and can never be changed.

However, today the Catholic Church cannot judge whether the person who committed suicide is in Heaven or Hell because we don't know what he/she thought in the final second of their life. The same can be said of Judas Iscariot. Today, Mass is held even for those who committed suicide and buried on blessed ground. Today, we pray for those who committed suicide. This is what has changed today.

According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

2281 Suicide contradicts the natural inclination of the human being to preserve and perpetuate his life. It is gravely contrary to the just love of self. It likewise offends love of neighbor because it unjustly breaks the ties of solidarity with family, nation, and other human societies to which we continue to have obligations. Suicide is contrary to love for the living God.

2282 If suicide is committed with the intention of setting an example, especially to the young, it also takes on the gravity of scandal. Voluntary co-operation in suicide is contrary to the moral law.

Grave psychological disturbances, anguish, or grave fear of hardship, suffering, or torture can diminish the responsibility of the one committing suicide.

2283 We should not despair of the eternal salvation of persons who have taken their own lives. By ways known to him alone, God can provide the opportunity for salutary repentance. The Church prays for persons who have taken their own lives.

Jesus condemned Judas in clear, unrevokable terms. And it wasn't for committing suicide, it was for the worst betrayal in the history of mankind.

Selene · Jul 18, 2013

This Vale Of Tears said:
Jesus condemned Judas in clear, unrevokable terms. And it wasn't for committing suicide, it was for the worst betrayal in the history of mankind.

The Catholic Church does not make the claim that Judas Iscariot is in Hell. For all we know, Jesus could be speaking of a hyperbole such as "it would be best to cut off your hands rather than your whole body thrown into Hell." Jesus did not intend to be taken literally when He stated that it's best to cut off their hand rather than be thrown into Hell. That the comment in Matthew 26:24 may also have been a hyperbole is indicated by the fact that Jesus was also betrayed by Peter when Peter denied knowing Christ. Both Peter and Judas betrayed Christ. The only difference is that Judas gave in to despair while Peter did not.

In the Book of Acts, the Apostles never said that Judas was in Hell. They simply said He went to his own place. The Church also does not claim to know for certain that Judas Iscariot is in Hell. Pope John Paul II also mentions about Judas Iscariot in his writing Crossing the Threshold of Hope. According to his book: "Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, 'It would be better for that man if he had never been born' (Mt 26:24), his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation."

This Vale Of Tears · Jul 18, 2013

Selene said:
The Catholic Church does not make the claim that Judas Iscariot is in Hell.

The Catholic Church does not make the claim that he isn't.

In the Book of Acts, the Apostles never said that Judas was in Hell.

You are twice arguing from absence. The Bible doesn't record everything the apostles did and said and even if they didn't say it, it does not demonstrate they believed otherwise.

They simply said He went to his own place. The Church also does not claim to know for certain that Judas Iscariot is in Hell. Pope John Paul II also mentions about Judas Iscariot in his writing Crossing the Threshold of Hope. According to his book: "Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, 'It would be better for that man if he had never been born' (Mt 26:24), his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation."

Yes, I have that book too and as I've said many times, the opinions of Popes are not compelling to the faithful; they are just opinions. The late John Paul II also made statements in that book that indicated a Universal Salvation outlook. It's just an opinion and none of it is spoken ex cathedra so as to bear upon the official teachings of the Church. Using the opinions of popes in an argument is just so much fodder and does nothing to advance your position.

Selene · Jul 18, 2013

Vale, the Apostles did mention where Judas went in the Bible. They said that Judas went "to his own place." "To his own place" is not an indication of Heaven or Hell. Therefore, the Bible did indeed record where Judas is. We just don't know where "his own place" is. Even the Apostolic Tradition does not say where it is.

Furthermore, there are only two doctrines in the Roman Catholic Church that has ever been declared ex cathedra. And according to the Catechism, anything which the Pope speaks regarding faith and morals (even if not spoken in ex cathedra) is not the opinion of the Pope but coming from Divine assistance (See CCC #892) . It only becomes his opinion when he speaks OUTSIDE of faith and morals. In addition, you also know that the only one who has the authority to correctly interpret Sacred Scripture would be the Church and not individual Catholics. So, when the Pope wrote: "Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, 'It would be better for that man if he had never been born' (Mt 26:24), his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation." this already becomes an interpretation of scripture according to the Church because it is coming from the Pope....the successor of the Apostle Peter. As for Church teaching, we cannot judge anyone (including those who committed suicide) to Hell.

It is already recorded in the bible that Judas went to "his own place." This was revealed to the Apostles, but our tradition never says where "his own place is." Perhaps, in a way, it was a good thing that God never revealed to the Apostles exactly where Judas went.

JB_Reformed Baptist · Jul 18, 2013

"Loud and boisterous and knoweth nothing comes to mind". :mellow:

Selene · Jul 18, 2013

JB_ said:
"Loud and boisterous and knoweth nothing comes to mind". :mellow:

HUH??

Rex · Jul 18, 2013

JB_ said:
"Loud and boisterous and knoweth nothing comes to mind". :mellow:

Proverbs 9:13-18 ESV

13 The woman Folly is loud;
she is seductive and knows nothing.
14 She sits at the door of her house; -------->>> I wonder what house that might be? JB? LOL
she takes a seat on the highest places of the town,
15 calling to those who pass by,
who are going straight on their way,
16 “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!”
And to him who lacks sense she says,
17 “Stolen water is sweet,
and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.”
18 But he does not know that the dead are there,
that her guests are in the depths of Sheol.

Selene · Jul 18, 2013

Rex said:
Proverbs 9:13-18 ESV

13 The woman Folly is loud;
she is seductive and knows nothing.
14 She sits at the door of her house; -------->>> I wonder what house that might be? JB? LOL
she takes a seat on the highest places of the town,
15 calling to those who pass by,
who are going straight on their way,
16 “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!”
And to him who lacks sense she says,
17 “Stolen water is sweet,
and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.”
18 But he does not know that the dead are there,
that her guests are in the depths of Sheol.

Rex, apparently, you don't know the discussion between one Roman Catholic to another Roman Catholic.....so words like "ex cathedra" would naturally mean nothing to you.

Rex · Jul 18, 2013

But I did know what JB was talking about didn't I

unlike your reply

Selene said:
HUH??

ex ca·the·dra
/ˌeks kəˈTHēdrə/
Adverb
With the full authority of office (esp. of the pope's infallibility as defined in Roman Catholic doctrine).

Selene · Jul 18, 2013

Rex said:
But I did know what JB was talking about didn't I

unlike your reply

And JB is not a Roman Catholic as well.

Rex said:
ex ca·the·dra
/ˌeks kəˈTHēdrə/
Adverb
With the full authority of office (esp. of the pope's infallibility as defined in Roman Catholic doctrine).

Naturally, you had to look it up, but you don't need to define for me. I already know what it is.

This Vale Of Tears · Jul 18, 2013

Selene said:
Vale, the Apostles did mention where Judas went in the Bible. They said that Judas went "to his own place." "To his own place" is not an indication of Heaven or Hell. Therefore, the Bible did indeed record where Judas is. We just don't know where "his own place" is. Even the Apostolic Tradition does not say where it is.

Furthermore, there are only two doctrines in the Roman Catholic Church that has ever been declared ex cathedra. And according to the Catechism, anything which the Pope speaks regarding faith and morals (even if not spoken in ex cathedra) is not the opinion of the Pope but coming from Divine assistance (See CCC #892) . It only becomes his opinion when he speaks OUTSIDE of faith and morals. In addition, you also know that the only one who has the authority to correctly interpret Sacred Scripture would be the Church and not individual Catholics. So, when the Pope wrote: "Even when Jesus says of Judas, the traitor, 'It would be better for that man if he had never been born' (Mt 26:24), his words do not allude for certain to eternal damnation." this already becomes an interpretation of scripture according to the Church because it is coming from the Pope....the successor of the Apostle Peter. As for Church teaching, we cannot judge anyone (including those who committed suicide) to Hell.

It is already recorded in the bible that Judas went to "his own place." This was revealed to the Apostles, but our tradition never says where "his own place is." Perhaps, in a way, it was a good thing that God never revealed to the Apostles exactly where Judas went.

You are much in need of an education on ex cathedra and papal infallibility. Though pronouncements are rarely declared ex cathedra, all decisions a pope makes in his official capacity are considered so and by extension infallibly inspired by the Holy Spirit. I noticed you kind of glossed over that John Paul II believed in a universalist salvation, or at least that the punishments of hell are terminal. The reason this didn't cause a crisis in the Magisterium?.....because it was his private opinion. Nothing written in that book was offered in an official capacity. You might want to start your education here:

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility

I particularly liked this exerpt:

"Other people wonder how infallibility could exist if some popes disagreed with others. This, too, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals. A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching."

Now why did I use ex cathedra instead of infallible? Because ex cathedra is the particular infallibility of the Pope when speaking from his office on issues of faith and morals when a doctrine has come into question. Infallibility is more generally assigned to the body of bishops, not just the Pope. Ex cathedra, meaning "from the chair" denotes the Pope's succession from the Seat of Peter along with the same, unmitigated authority.

I know it may take time for you to warm up to the concept that you're wrong because you likely have been going for years treating every opinion of the Pope as official church teaching, but it's better that you re-examine your thinking on this rather than to persist in error.

Rex said:
But I did know what JB was talking about didn't I

unlike your reply

ex ca·the·dra
/ˌeks kəˈTHēdrə/
Adverb
With the full authority of office (esp. of the pope's infallibility as defined in Roman Catholic doctrine).

Being able to look up a word is not the same as having understanding of it. I would venture to assume that you'll never understand the meaning of ex cathedra as long as you live.

Selene said:
Rex, apparently, you don't know the discussion between one Roman Catholic to another Roman Catholic.....so words like "ex cathedra" would naturally mean nothing to you.

And this is indeed one Roman Catholic to another Roman Catholic. Nobody drives a wedge between us. We are brothers and sisters.

Rex · Jul 18, 2013

This Vale Of Tears said:
Being able to look up a word is not the same as having understanding of it. I would venture to assume that you'll never understand the meaning of ex cathedra as long as you live.

And this is indeed one Roman Catholic to another Roman Catholic. Nobody drives a wedge between us. We are brothers and sisters.

Believe me I've seen and dealt with the every changing definitions RC are so fond of using.

You know the children's story of the Tiger? well If you keep running around the same tree you turn to butter, I've watch it many times.

Selene · Jul 19, 2013

This Vale Of Tears said:
You are much in need of an education on ex cathedra and papal infallibility. Though pronouncements are rarely declared ex cathedra, all decisions a pope makes in his official capacity are considered so and by extension infallibly inspired by the Holy Spirit. I noticed you kind of glossed over that John Paul II believed in a universalist salvation, or at least that the punishments of hell are terminal. The reason this didn't cause a crisis in the Magisterium?.....because it was his private opinion. Nothing written in that book was offered in an official capacity. You might want to start your education here:

http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility

I particularly liked this exerpt:

"Other people wonder how infallibility could exist if some popes disagreed with others. This, too, shows an inaccurate understanding of infallibility, which applies only to solemn, official teachings on faith and morals, not to disciplinary decisions or even to unofficial comments on faith and morals. A pope’s private theological opinions are not infallible, only what he solemnly defines is considered to be infallible teaching."

Vale, it did not stir anything in the Magisterium because you interpreted it differently. Below is an encyclical of the Blessed Pope John Paul II printed in the Vatican website. Notice that it looks like he's supporting universal salvation in that encyclical?

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_07121990_redemptoris-missio_en.html

According to the encyclical, it stated: For this reason the Council, after affirming the centrality of the Paschal Mystery, went on to declare that "this applies not only to Christians but to all people of good will in whose hearts grace is secretly at work. Since Christ died for everyone, and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and is therefore a universal one, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God."19

This may sound like universal salvation; however, the encyclical is actually saying that every man and woman who was ever born had the possibility of salvation. What they did with that possibility is another story. Pope John Paul II did NOT support universal salvation, and he believes that Hell is an eternal separation from God. On July 28, 1999, the Pope stated that Hell is eternal.

Redemption nevertheless remains an offer of salvation which it is up to people to accept freely. This is why they will all be judged “by what they [have done]” (Rv 20:13). By using images, the New Testament presents the place destined for evildoers as a fiery furnace, where people will “weep and gnash their teeth” (Mt 13:42; cf. 25:30, 41), or like Gehenna with its “unquenchable fire” (Mk 9:43). All this is narrated in the parable of the rich man, which explains that hell is a place of eternal suffering, with no possibility of return, nor of the alleviation of pain (cf. Lk 16:19-31).

[SIZE=medium]The Book of Revelation also figuratively portrays in a “pool of fire” those who exclude themselves from the book of life, thus meeting with a “second death” (Rv 20:13f.). Whoever continues to be closed to the Gospel is therefore preparing for “eternal destruction and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thes 1:9).[/SIZE]

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1999/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_28071999_en.html

Now why did I use ex cathedra instead of infallible? Because ex cathedra is the particular infallibility of the Pope when speaking from his office on issues of faith and morals when a doctrine has come into question. Infallibility is more generally assigned to the body of bishops, not just the Pope. Ex cathedra, meaning "from the chair" denotes the Pope's succession from the Seat of Peter along with the same, unmitigated authority.

I know it may take time for you to warm up to the concept that you're wrong because you likely have been going for years treating every opinion of the Pope as official church teaching, but it's better that you re-examine your thinking on this rather than to persist in error.

Secondly, there are only TWO things that have been declared ex cathedra in the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church. So, for more than 2000 years, we only have TWO things declared in ex cathedra. The use of ex cathedra is extremely RARE, so why would you even want to use ex cathedra?? Nevertheless, the Pope has a certain authority when speaking to Catholics especially in regards to faith and morals.

Now finally, back to Judas Iscariot. The Catholic Church does not say that Judas is in Hell nor in Heaven. It is only your interpretation that Judas is in Hell. I take the side of the Church. I don't know where he is. Even the Bible does not specify exactly where "his own place" is. As for the scriptural interpretation of Matthew 26:24, this is what Catholic Answers have to say (See the weblink below):

http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/did-judas-go-to-hell

For a longer discussion on Judas Iscariot, including the question regarding his fate, you can refer to the Catholic Encyclopedia:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08539a.htm

And this is indeed one Roman Catholic to another Roman Catholic. Nobody drives a wedge between us. We are brothers and sisters.

There are times that Roman Catholics will disagree, but this is why we have the Church to turn to. So, while you believe that Judas is in Hell, I will have to take the side of the Church. After all, I never said that Judas was in Hell nor did I ever say that he is in Heaven. The possibility exists that he could be in Hell or he could be in Heaven. I will go with what the Church teaches about judging others (including those who committed suicide) to Hell. It was really never our place to determine who is in Hell anyway.

KingJ · Jul 19, 2013

The issue with Judas is that he was a disciple who betrayed Jesus. He experienced Godly sorrow / true love and devotion for God when accepting the calling to be a disciple! Otherwise he would not have been chosen to be a disciple! His betrayal was thus at an extremity. It is interesting that he hanged himself though. That shows that God did not kill him, rather driven by remorse. The fact that he died however, shows that God did not stop him. The bottom line for me though is, how are we any different when we attack each other? We are not far from Judas as Jesus is in each of us.

As for Judas being predestined....God made him for hell? God is not evil. He is impartial to the maximum. Hence we have to believe the price of betrayal was foreknown, not the person. Jesus knew it was Judas from being with him.

As for Judas's repentance not being from Godly sorrow....he was already a disciple. Still it is definitely food for thought Horsecamp and JB. I would assume though that if he went to all the effort of returning the money and then following through with hanging himself he was showing sorrow to the maximum. To assume there was not any sincere repentance is surely a longshot :blink:.

JB_Reformed Baptist · Jul 20, 2013

KingJ said:
The issue with Judas is that he was a disciple who betrayed Jesus. He experienced Godly sorrow / true love and devotion for God when accepting the calling to be a disciple! Otherwise he would not have been chosen to be a disciple! His betrayal was thus at an extremity. It is interesting that he hanged himself though. That shows that God did not kill him, rather driven by remorse. The fact that he died however, shows that God did not stop him. The bottom line for me though is, how are we any different when we attack each other? We are not far from Judas as Jesus is in each of us.

As for Judas being predestined....God made him for hell? God is not evil. He is impartial to the maximum. Hence we have to believe the price of betrayal was foreknown, not the person. Jesus knew it was Judas from being with him.

As for Judas's repentance not being from Godly sorrow....he was already a disciple. Still it is definitely food for thought Horsecamp and JB. I would assume though that if he went to all the effort of returning the money and then following through with hanging himself he was showing sorrow to the maximum. To assume there was not any sincere repentance is surely a longshot :blink:.

I don't think that follows the tenor of Judas life nor how he was spoken about, by the LORD. If Godly sorrow leads to repentance= facing GOD and NOT to be repented of, then, he would have been assisted of the LORD.

But there's a fundamental difference between a guilt ridden and repentant heart and one who from the heart continuously practices sin. Such as the sin of covetousness to which Judas was so clearly guilty. The indictment of the Lord Jesus Christ of Judas ought NOT to be lightly considered. Indeed, it's Christ's appraisal of him that gives us a clear picture of the man.

To go to his place is a softened form of to the pit he went.

As the LORD says "the love of money is the ROOT of ALL EVIL"... .

This Vale Of Tears · Jul 21, 2013

Selene said:
Vale, it did not stir anything in the Magisterium because you interpreted it differently. Below is an encyclical of the Blessed Pope John Paul II printed in the Vatican website. Notice that it looks like he's supporting universal salvation in that encyclical?

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_07121990_redemptoris-missio_en.html

According to the encyclical, it stated: For this reason the Council, after affirming the centrality of the Paschal Mystery, went on to declare that "this applies not only to Christians but to all people of good will in whose hearts grace is secretly at work. Since Christ died for everyone, and since the ultimate calling of each of us comes from God and is therefore a universal one, we are obliged to hold that the Holy Spirit offers everyone the possibility of sharing in this Paschal Mystery in a manner known to God."19

This may sound like universal salvation; however, the encyclical is actually saying that every man and woman who was ever born had the possibility of salvation. What they did with that possibility is another story. Pope John Paul II did NOT support universal salvation, and he believes that Hell is an eternal separation from God. On July 28, 1999, the Pope stated that Hell is eternal.

Redemption nevertheless remains an offer of salvation which it is up to people to accept freely. This is why they will all be judged “by what they [have done]” (Rv 20:13). By using images, the New Testament presents the place destined for evildoers as a fiery furnace, where people will “weep and gnash their teeth” (Mt 13:42; cf. 25:30, 41), or like Gehenna with its “unquenchable fire” (Mk 9:43). All this is narrated in the parable of the rich man, which explains that hell is a place of eternal suffering, with no possibility of return, nor of the alleviation of pain (cf. Lk 16:19-31).

[SIZE=medium]The Book of Revelation also figuratively portrays in a “pool of fire” those who exclude themselves from the book of life, thus meeting with a “second death” (Rv 20:13f.). Whoever continues to be closed to the Gospel is therefore preparing for “eternal destruction and exclusion from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his might” (2 Thes 1:9).[/SIZE]

http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/audiences/1999/documents/hf_jp-ii_aud_28071999_en.html

I made it very clear that I was referring to something JPII wrote in Crossing The Threshold of Hope, since you used it as a reference.

Secondly, there are only TWO things that have been declared ex cathedra in the entire history of the Roman Catholic Church. So, for more than 2000 years, we only have TWO things declared in ex cathedra. The use of ex cathedra is extremely RARE, so why would you even want to use ex cathedra?? Nevertheless, the Pope has a certain authority when speaking to Catholics especially in regards to faith and morals.

As I explained, an official declaration of ex cathedra is rare, much like an official declaration of war in U.S. history. But as all congressional authorizations of force are considered declarations of war, so too is anything the Pope clarifies in an official capacity considered ex cathedra even if the words aren't used. And the pope has NO authority when he isn't speaking from a position of authority. You add incorrigibility to ignorance because I already pointed you in the right direction so you can correct your error. Not everything a Pope says is church teaching and thereby compelling to all Catholics. You continue to embarrass yourself and all Catholics by persisting in this thinking.

Now finally, back to Judas Iscariot. The Catholic Church does not say that Judas is in Hell nor in Heaven. It is only your interpretation that Judas is in Hell. I take the side of the Church. I don't know where he is. Even the Bible does not specify exactly where "his own place" is. As for the scriptural interpretation of Matthew 26:24, this is what Catholic Answers have to say (See the weblink below):

Do you know how childish you sound? "You can believe what you want, but I'm going to believe what the CHURCH says". The Church isn't any more on your side as it is on mine. By taking no position, speculation is allowed. This is certainly true on the issue of Limbo that the Church remained ambivalent on until 2007. By taking no position, people were allowed to debate its merits, and people did so. Your position that on an issue that hasn't been defined we're not allowed to speculate is absolutely absurd and without merit.

There are times that Roman Catholics will disagree, but this is why we have the Church to turn to. So, while you believe that Judas is in Hell, I will have to take the side of the Church. After all, I never said that Judas was in Hell nor did I ever say that he is in Heaven. The possibility exists that he could be in Hell or he could be in Heaven. I will go with what the Church teaches about judging others (including those who committed suicide) to Hell. It was really never our place to determine who is in Hell anyway.

It really is like pulling teeth for you to admit that what you have is just an opinion. This is the second time you made the ridiculous claim that you're toeing the line of Church teaching. And it's rather immature and even prideful to think that everything you believe is absolute truth while what other people believe is a schismatic opinion. I believe that Jesus spoke in incontrovertible terms about the eternal fate of one particular individual. It doesn't invite speculation on the eternal fate of anyone else, nor have I intimated as much. You choosing to see it differently means nothing more than that you have an opinion at variance with mine. The Church is not on your side, so get over yourself.

Sheesh!

A JUDAS TYPE OF REPENTANCE

New Member

New Member

“"The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few

New Member

Indian Papist

New Member

Indian Papist

New Member

Many are called but few are chosen.

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Indian Papist

New Member

New Member

New Member

Many are called but few are chosen.

Indian Papist

Similar threads