Really? REALLY?!?

[musterion]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-assures-atheists-you-dont-have-to-believe-in-god-to-go-to-heaven-8810062.html

The obvious question this raises is, "If true, what does anyone even need the Roman Catholic church for?"

 

[servant]

The headline is misleading. Francis didn't say that. I think the reporter or writer has attempted to tarnish Francis with a subtle bashing. And, btw, I'm no fan of the church of Rome.

 

[musterion]

Condensed, perhaps, but not misleading:

“The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience...Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience.”

His logic is this: Do not disobey your conscience and you do not sin, even if you continue to reject God.

Since sin is what separates man from God, one can (by his logic) hypothetically reject God but, in following his/her conscience, not sin. If the atheist has not sinned against his/her conscience, he/she would have no sin to separate him/her from God and, thus, very well could end up in Heaven (again, by his logic). And if even the utterly faithless can pull that off, then any religious but Christ-rejecting pagan certainly could too.

Conclusion: the new pope is, for all practical purposes, a universalist who has just confirmed multiple millions of unbelievers in their sin.

 

[Selene]

Condensed, perhaps, but not misleading:


His logic is this: Do not disobey your conscience and you do not sin, even if you continue to reject God.

Since sin is what separates man from God, one can (by his logic) hypothetically reject God but, in following his/her conscience, not sin. If the atheist has not sinned against his/her conscience, he/she would have no sin to separate him/her from God and, thus, very well could end up in Heaven (again, by his logic). And if even the utterly faithless can pull that off, then any religious but Christ-rejecting pagan certainly could too.

Conclusion: the new pope is, for all practical purposes, a universalist who has just confirmed multiple millions of unbelievers in their sin.

Sin is what separates man from God. The Pope is not a universalist because like every Catholic, he believes that the only ones who goes to Hell are the "unrepentant wicked." Every Catholic also believe that it is only God who judges who goes to Heaven and who goes to Hell. It is not man who makes those judgement. The possibility does exist that even a non-Christian can find salvation. After all, in order to reject Christ, one must FIRST hear about Christ. A pagan child who grew up never hearing the name of Christ or read the Holy Bible cannot reject something he never heard. Thus, if that child dies having never heard of Jesus Christ, would God condemn that child to Hell? Judgement belongs to God alone and God can have mercy on whomever He wants (Romans 9:15). So, if Christ can forgive the pagan Roman soldiers who were ignorant of who they nailed to the cross, then the possibility exists that God can also forgive those who are ignorant of His existence.

 

[servant]

I agree with you. My point was merely the reporter and the headline attributed to Francis something he did not say. Atheist's are deniers of God whereas a person who has not come to faith are the people he was referring to.

“You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith. I start by saying – and this is the fundamental thing – that God’s mercy has no limits if you go to him with a sincere and contrite heart. The issue for those who do not believe in God is to obey their conscience.

He should have said, 'the issue for those who have not yet come to believe in God is to obey their conscience'.

 

[musterion]

The Pope is not a universalist because like every Catholic, he believes that the only ones who goes to Hell are the "unrepentant wicked."

Nice try, Selene. Futile, but nice. Your pope just said atheists - simply by virtue of being atheists - sin ONLY IF they violate their consciences. If an atheist does not violate his conscience, he/she is without sin, thus can end up right with God.

Conclusion: universalism; i.e., the false belief that any man may become right with God independent of the cross of Christ.

It is not man who makes those judgement.

He just did.


Your argument isn't with me, Selene, it's with your pope.

 

[Selene]

The headline is misleading. Francis didn't say that. I think the reporter or writer has attempted to tarnish Francis with a subtle bashing. And, btw, I'm no fan of the church of Rome.

You are correct. The Pope never said that one doesn't need to believe in God to have salvation. The Pope stated, "Sin, even for those who have no faith, exists when people disobey their conscience.” and "If someone is gay and is looking for the Lord, who am I to judge?" These were his actual words. He is aligned with Catholic teaching. Anti-Catholic news article like this simply use headlines like this to mislead people into thinking negatively about something which the Pope never said. And unfortunately, most people only read the headlines rather than what the Pope actually said.

 

[musterion]

I agree with you. My point was merely the reporter and the headline attributed to Francis something he did not say.

It is the logical conclusion of what he did say, as it was reported. If there was more he said that was not reported, that's another matter but, as it is, you have no proof for what you assert.

Atheist's are deniers of God whereas a person who has not come to faith are the people he was referring to.

Where in this piece did he draw a distinction between the two?

He should have said, 'the issue for those who have not yet come to believe in God is to obey their conscience'.

Again, you're reading into what he said something he did not say (as far as this report goes), but easily could have had he meant to. The man is not an idiot, after all.

But again...if THAT was the context of his comment, it will have to be demonstrated by a full report on what he actually DID say. Short of that...he said what he said and it very much allows the faithless a route to God wholly apart from Christ.

 

[Selene]

It is the logical conclusion of what he did say, as it was reported. If there was more he said that was not reported, that's another matter but, as it is, you have no proof for what you assert.

It was the prejudice conclusion of an anti-Catholic newspaper who couldn't quote the Pope's exact words in the headlines.

 

[musterion]

Judgement belongs to God alone and God can have mercy on whomever He wants (Romans 9:15).

The context of that passage is God's use of nations and individuals for His purposes, not the salvation of individuals. You are twisting Scripture. And the fact remains that God has NO MERCY on any who refuse His Son. The pope just gave people a way around that via an inviolate conscience.

So, if Christ can forgive the pagan Roman soldiers who were ignorant of who they nailed to the cross, then the possibility exists that God can also forgive those who are ignorant of His existence.

Demonstrate from God's Word where any can now be saved apart from trusting [which requires knowing about] Christ's death, burial and resurrection from the dead on his or her behalf.

It was the prejudice conclusion of an anti-Catholic newspaper who couldn't quote the Pope's exact words in the headlines.

Wrong. The pope's exact words, as quoted in the article, align precisely with the headline.

Listen, I get it. I understand your predicament: nowhere in the piece, as reported, did your pope exclude atheists or say he really only meant those who had not yet believed but someday will do so. I know that's what you desperately WANT and NEED him to have said because you believe you can't get to Heaven without him, yet you see the awful error in what he did say...but the fact remains...until a retraction or correction is printed...your pope said what he said. Stop wishcasting and trying to read in to what he said what is not there. Just accept it: your pope opened the door of salvation to the faithless via their consciences WITH NO MENTION WHATSOEVER OF CHRIST.

He should have said, 'the issue for those who have not yet come to believe in God is to obey their conscience'.

I should have read it again. The pope's statement precludes your assertion:

“You ask me if the God of the Christians forgives those who don’t believe and who don’t seek the faith.

The context of the question was atheists and that's the context in which he answered it.

 

[Selene]

The context of that passage is God's use of nations and individuals for His purposes, not the salvation of individuals. You are twisting Scripture. And the fact remains that God has NO MERCY on any who refuse His Son. The pope just gave people a way around that via an inviolate conscience.


Demonstrate from God's Word where any can now be saved apart from trusting [which requires knowing about] Christ's death, burial and resurrection from the dead on his or her behalf.



Wrong. The pope's exact words, as quoted in the article, align precisely with the headline.

Listen, I get it. I understand your predicament: nowhere in the piece, as reported, did your pope exclude atheists or say he really only meant those who had not yet believed but someday will do so. I know that's what you desperately WANT and NEED him to have said because you believe you can't get to Heaven without him, yet you see the awful error in what he did say...but the fact remains...until a retraction or correction is printed...your pope said what he said. Stop wishcasting and trying to read in to what he said what is not there. Just accept it: your pope opened the door of salvation to the faithless via their consciences WITH NO MENTION WHATSOEVER OF CHRIST.


I should have read it again. The pope's statement precludes your assertion:


The context of the question was atheists and that's the context in which he answered it.

I already said it, but you didn't read my post. I already stated that in order to reject Christ, one must first hear of Christ. There are some atheists like Christopher Hitchens who have heard of Christ and rejected him. And there are some atheists who were brought up in an atheist environment having never heard the name of Jesus Christ nor read the Bible. One cannot reject something they haven't heard of. This is why Christians are told to spread the Gospel to non-Christians so they can hear the name of Christ and come to know Him.

This is also the reason why we let God be the judge. He's the only one who knows the heart of a person. Do you think God would condemn a child who died having never had the chance of hearing who He is? Do you think that Abraham, Issac, and Jacob are all condemned to Hell simply because they never heard the name of Jesus Christ??

 

[Eltanin]

I am not Catholic, but I must agree with Selene...

The News artcle didn't seem to quote the Pope word for word in the language he wrote. The article translated and took a little liberty with the presentation of the translation... Really it is a common problem in Christianity.

The news is reporting that he was talking about atheists, but he was trying to answer a seemingly loaded question posed to him about God forgiving people who don't follow or are not interested in following the faith (a bit broader than atheism)... I honestly think he did quite well with the answer.

Instead of going to a biased third-hand or forth-hand source for an article, why not go straight to the source. http://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/09/11/news/sintesi_lettera_bergoglio-66283390/

I kinda get the impression that he was trying to make a point that a humble believer isn't usually in the business of making judgment on others...

 

[musterion]

Selene, you just need to stay out of any threads I start, for your own good.

You spent days at the other thread attempting to convince me that non-Catholics can be saved just by virtue of a belief in God, but you insisted that belief in God was necessary to their salvation, even if they don't know and never trust Christ.

Now -- this is really hilarious when you step back and look at it -- now YOUR POPE just came by and jerked the rug clean out from under you by contradicting you and saying atheists can be saved WITHOUT ANY BELIEF IN GOD OR CHRIST.

Your pope proved you wrong. Did you get that? Everything you said a few weeks ago to me? Your pope just blew it clean outta the water.

As I said before, I do understand your consternation and confusion but your arguments - if they can be called that - are utterly unconvincing, as they were before. You're just not very good at this because you're on the losing side. But now...to make it even worse for you...YOUR OWN POPE says you're wrong. Can it get any worse for you here? I don't see how!

Here's your takeout bag for this thread: YOUR POPE, who weighs more than you do theologically, said something that contradicts what YOU said ALL Catholics believe. Why should I believe you over him?

Heaven is now open for business with non-conscience-violating atheists...YOUR POPE SAID SO. Don't like it? Hey, I just pointed it out. Yet you want to argue with ME about it? Why? Your argument is with YOUR POPE.

So go sit down and write him a letter, won't you? Maybe you can convince him you're right.

Oh...that's right. You're not at liberty to question him. Bummer.

Now please unsubscribe, you're just embarrassing yourself again.

I am not Catholic, but I must agree with Selene...

The News artcle didn't seem to quote the Pope word for word in the language he wrote. The article translated and took a little liberty with the presentation of the translation... Really it is a common problem in Christianity.

The news is reporting that he was talking about atheists, but he was trying to answer a seemingly loaded question posed to him about God forgiving people who don't follow or are not interested in following the faith (a bit broader than atheism)... I honestly think he did quite well with the answer.

Instead of going to a biased third-hand or forth-hand source for an article, why not go straight to the source. http://www.repubblica.it/cultura/2013/09/11/news/sintesi_lettera_bergoglio-66283390/

I kinda get the impression that he was trying to make a point that a humble believer isn't usually in the business of making judgment on others...

The pope said those who do NOT pursue faith in God can be saved by not violating their conscience, with no mention of Christ.

God Himself has said such are already condemned lest they repent.

If that isn't clear enough for you, translation isn't your problem.

 

[Arnie Manitoba]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/pope-francis-assures-atheists-you-dont-have-to-believe-in-god-to-go-to-heaven-8810062.html

The obvious question this raises is, "If true, what does anyone even need the Roman Catholic church for?"

Ask any atheist a few questions and soon he will reveal that most of all , he does not want anything to do with all the religious nonsense he sees in the world , nor does he want anything to do with their gods , nor does he believe in their gods.

In what ways are you contributing to the nonsense musterion ?

Does it make you happy if a Pope is mis-quoted and mis-translated ?

Does it make you happy knowing no Catholics are nearly as good as you think you are ?

Are you not rubbing your hands with glee because the atheist - journalist Eugenio Scalfari appears to have scored a victory against the Pope and the Catholics?

Your heart and spirit are showing musterion

Better for you to read the whole original article by the Pope .... and then maybe stop rubbing your hands with glee in support of guys like Eugenio Scalfari

http://rorate-caeli.blogspot.com/2013/09/full-text-of-popes-letter-to-atheist.html

I am not Catholic , nor do I hate them.

A.M.

 

[musterion]

Awfully self-righteous there, A.M., for someone who clearly did not bother to read - or did not comprehend - his own link.

First of all, you ask if the God of the Christians forgives those who do not believe and do not seek faith. Given that - and this is fundamental - God's mercy has no limits if he who asks for mercy does so in contrition and with a sincere heart, the issue for those who do not believe in God is in obeying their own conscience. IN FACT, listening [to] and obeying [the conscience], means deciding about what is perceived to be good or to be evil. The goodness or the wickedness of our behavior [sin!] depends on THIS decision.

Thanks for providing this full text for, as noted in the bold above, the pope actually doubled down on his claim that the conscience is the determiner of whether someone who rejects faith in Christ is in sin or not. Thank you for reinforcing the whole point I've been trying to make!

The Bible does say the conscience informs man that Someone is watching and judging, but that is all. The problem with conscience is that it is easily ignored, denied, perverted and even seared into insensibility by repeatedly ignoring its warnings. The Bible also warns that the heart is desperately wicked and sick; another reason conscience cannot be 100% trustworthy.

So the conscience - according to the Bible - cannot make one right with God. That takes direct revelation of His Word and His will to do that, which has already gone out into the world in the Gospel of the grace of God.

DESPITE THIS FACT, the pope's last word on the matter (which you kindly provided) was to emphasize NOT the Gospel but to reiterate his point that the unbeliever's obedience to his conscience determines his state of sin.

That is not only a false and unbiblical claim the pope made, it is antibiblical. Obeying conscience cannot save someone who has knowingly rejected Christ. Yet in his earlier reference to those who "DO NOT" seek faith, the pope stated conscience can save him. Here he actually CLARIFIED AND EMPHASIZED HIS POINT!

Who does that please more: Satan or Christ?

Worse, the the pope - supposedly God's mouthpiece on earth - never once flatly warned this unbeliever that he will surely perish in Hell if he dies rejecting Christ. Quite an oversight for the purported "vicar of Christ" to make.

Who does that please more: Satan or Christ?

So how much does the pope really love and care for this man's eternal soul if he refused to warn him of such a stark truth that he will burn lest he repent unto Christ? How much does the pope really love and care for him if, instead of the saving Gospel, he showers him with smooth, "serene" words, doubletalk and foolish philosophy? This also pleased Satan greatly...for who but Satan could be more pleased to see a Christ-hating infidel have his warped conscience soothed a bit by the purported leader of Christianity telling him that if he but follows his conscience, God - if He turns out to exist at all - will cut the atheist some slack? Satan LOVES that talk (already very common in protestantism) because it not merely denies but SPITS UPON the finished work of Christ on the cross as the ONLY way to the Father.

Instead of "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved," the pope as much as said,

"Obey your conscience and you will be right with God, even ye of no faith whatsoever."

The pope spoke for Satan in his letter and here you are defending it. Be gone, you blinded hypocrite.

 

[jiggyfly]

Conclusion: universalism; i.e., the false belief that any man may become right with God independent of the cross of Christ.

Very broad definition of "universalism". I believe in universal reconciliation but it is not independent of the cross of Christ it is because of the cross of Christ just as the scriptures state. I am not a fan of any religion and Catholicism is no different than the rest as far as I am concerned. Sorry if I derailed your thread, I am happy to continue a discussion of UR in another thread if you like, just let me know.

 

[musterion]

Let me rephrase it, then: the false belief that any man may become right with God independent of FAITH IN the cross of Christ; i.e., independent of believing the Gospel. I don't know if that's how you're defining U.R.

I believe in universal reconciliation in the very specific sense that God has made reconciliation unto Him available universally - that is, to any and all without exception - but only on the basis of His grace through faith in Christ. I see nowhere in the Bible that God has guaranteed salvation for all apart from faith in Christ, much less despite it.

I also know there are variants of universalism and that it is by no means monolithic. But the Bible nowhere says people can now or will be saved from the Lake of Fire merely because of the Cross. To be saved, one must exercise faith in Christ's sacrifice for his/her sin, and that faith must be exercised in this life for there's no second chance after death. Again, I don't know if we disagree on this because I don't know how you define U.R. But the pope was preaching (intentionally or not) a very broad form of universalism...man, in his naturally lost and God-hating state, will follow his conscience when it suits him, and is fully capable of convincing himself into believing he has followed it more often than he offended it, thus has earned "Heaven" or whatever by virtue of his good works.

The pope just made the already broad and smooth road to Hell a little bit smoother travel for billions.

 

[jiggyfly]

To be saved, one must exercise faith in Christ's sacrifice for his/her sin, and that faith must be exercised in this life for there's no second chance after death.

Do you have any scriptures to support you belief here?

 

[musterion]

Yes. Do you have Scripture showing a second chance at salvation after death for those who died rejecting Christ?

 

[jiggyfly]

Yes. Do you have Scripture showing a second chance at salvation after death for those who died rejecting Christ?

Yes I do.