Will the suffering of the damned be one of the great "joys of heavenly bliss"?

[seer]

BTW Jimbo, do you have that Aquinas quote in context of the whole work?

[jimbo]

Hamster,

""That the saints may enjoy their beatitude and the grace of God more abundantly, they are permitted to see the punishment of the damned in hell." Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274 CE), Summa Theologica.

I have seen this quote attributed to Aquinas many times in many different places. However, I tried to find this quote in context at the Summa Theologica webpage today, but the search engine didn't come up with anything. I also tried to find the quote "joys of heavenly bliss" but did not find it. Interesting.

I did find a section of the Summa Theologica in which Aquinas specualates about whether the damned can see the saved in heaven. That is located here:

http://www.newadvent.org/summa/509809.htm

Kind of a similar idea.

If you or anyone else has an explanation of why this quote is attributed to him but is not locatable on the Summa Theologica web page, I would be interested to see it.

Thanks.

Jimbo

[Piebald]

"After the judgment day, however, they will be altogether deprived of seeing the blessed: nor will this lessen their punishment, but will increase it; because they will bear in remembrance the glory of the blessed which they saw at or before the judgment: and this will torment them. Moreover they will be tormented by finding themselves deemed unworthy even to see the glory which the saints merit to have."

Interesting, this Aquinas guy.

Well, it could always be that someone summarized his position and someone took it for a quote and it spread (kind of like a rumor or something).

I'll keep looking though and see if I find anything. If I do, I'll report back.

[AtheistArchon]

- Erm. Once again, we have a meandering of beliefs, all which imply different scenarios as far as hell is concerned.

- Those Christians who believe in some sort of temporary hell, where people can be "redeemed", are in a pretty good spot morally. However, I'm not entirely sure where this particular belief comes from.

- Those who believe in the traditional hell, which is eternal, have the problem of justifying it. There is no amount of "evil" things I can do in my whole lifetime which could possibly justify an eternity of suffering.

- Additionally, we have (yet again) the old canard that people actually wouldn't be happy in heaven if they were "sinners"... as if hell is suddenly a pleasant place to be, and heaven is undesireable. Not only does this (if true) make biblical morality 100% arbitrary and meaningless (because it removes both the carrot and the stick, the two motivators behind that particular arcane concept), and not only does it have no biblical support that I'm aware of, it also makes heaven and hell equal in terms of "pleasantness". Why bother achieving heaven if you're going to be eternally happy either way?

- Lastly, again we have hints of "God doesn't send people to hell, people choose to go to hell." I'll give my parable one last prop in response: http://www.the-archon.com/Essays/choices.htm

[FirstSunday33ad]

Today @ 11:10 AM post located here
AtheistArchon:

- Erm. Once again, we have a meandering of beliefs, all which imply different scenarios as far as hell is concerned.

- Those Christians who believe in some sort of temporary hell, where people can be "redeemed", are in a pretty good spot morally. However, I'm not entirely sure where this particular belief comes from.

- Those who believe in the traditional hell, which is eternal, have the problem of justifying it. There is no amount of "evil" things I can do in my whole lifetime which could possibly justify an eternity of suffering.

- Additionally, we have (yet again) the old canard that people actually wouldn't be happy in heaven if they were "sinners"... as if hell is suddenly a pleasant place to be, and heaven is undesireable. Not only does this (if true) make biblical morality 100% arbitrary and meaningless (because it removes both the carrot and the stick, the two motivators behind that particular arcane concept), and not only does it have no biblical support that I'm aware of, it also makes heaven and hell equal in terms of "pleasantness". Why bother achieving heaven if you're going to be eternally happy either way?

- Lastly, again we have hints of "God doesn't send people to hell, people choose to go to hell." I'll give my parable one last prop in response: http://www.the-archon.com/Essays/choices.htm

You missed one:

Hell is temporary and then it along with the "sinners" are - poof – annihilated at judgement.

BTW - I have tried finding "eternal torture" in the Bible but have had absolutely no luck. Since non-Christians seem to find it on every page, perhaps you can point me to the pertinent verses?

Thanks.

[$cirisme]

07-05-2003 @ 12:48 AM post located here
jimbo:

The eternal torture of unbelievers is an idea that is clearly supported by the bible. Thomas Aquinas, heralded as one the great minds of the Holy Catholic Church, believed that the eternal torture of unbelievers was visible from Heaven. Presumably he had rock solid support underlying this claim of his.

Yeah, and I'm the queen of England.

And even if he had such evidence, 1: it isn't there today, 2: how dare anyone argue with Thomas! 3: "Experts" are not infallible.

Anyway, my question is in regard to how Christians on this board would react to seeing people being tortured mercilessly day after day. Would they ever tire of it?

Well, there is no torture.

But there is torment, the torment of being completely and totally separated from God for all of eternity. And Jesus and His Angels are the ones there, not those in heaven.

[AtheistArchon]

BTW - I have tried finding "eternal torture" in the Bible but have had absolutely no luck. Since non-Christians seem to find it on every page, perhaps you can point me to the pertinent verses?

- I never claimed it was, I only claim that the mainstream belief is that hell is eternal. And bad.

- But, if you're only interested in what you read in the bible, can you show me where you get the validation for the following?

Hell is temporary and then it along with the "sinners" are - poof – annihilated at judgement.

- Furthermore, what would the purpose of such a hell be? Is it an undesireable place? Why not annihilate the sinner outright?

[AtheistArchon]

Well, there is no torture.

But there is torment,

- If hell is in any way BAD, then the argument applies.

the torment of being completely and totally separated from God for all of eternity.

- So, atheists aren't really tormented at all. What does that make hell for us, then? It would feel like you'd feel with an eternity of being separated from the Jolly Green Giant.

- Or would we somehow "know" about god and Christianity after we die? If so, how?

[$cirisme]

Today @ 09:25 AM post located here
AtheistArchon:

- If hell is in any way BAD, then the argument applies.

Ummm, no.

It is not physical.

- So, atheists aren't really tormented at all. What does that make hell for us, then? It would feel like you'd feel with an eternity of being separated from the Jolly Green Giant.

There is a reason hell is described as a place of unquenchable fire. It is the separation of man, and the one who holds every bit of the universe together.

Of course, that's all irrelevant, huh?

[FirstSunday33ad]

I never claimed it was, I only claim that the mainstream belief is that hell is eternal. And bad.

Well it is bad, but it is not eternal:

Revelation 20
12And I saw the dead, great and small, standing before the throne, and books were opened. Another book was opened, which is the book of life. The dead were judged according to what they had done as recorded in the books. 13The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what he had done. 14Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.

But, if you're only interested in what you read in the bible, can you show me where you get the validation for the following?

I was just saying you missed one. Although annihilationism is an attractive view, I haven’t made up my mind one way or the other.

Furthermore, what would the purpose of such a hell be?

The soul has to go somewhere after death; if it is still in sin then it can’t go to God.

Is it an undesireable place?

Yes, Hell is an undesirable place since if you find yourself there you have a future that no matter how you cut it isn’t pleasant.

Why not annihilate the sinner outright?

Without being judged? How fair is that? Some may even be righteous and redeemable.

[FirstSunday33ad]

- So, atheists aren't really tormented at all. What does that make hell for us, then? It would feel like you'd feel with an eternity of being separated from the Jolly Green Giant.

- Or would we somehow "know" about god and Christianity after we die? If so, how?

Well, I would say that given the fact that you already know about God and Christianity now - you are in a sticky wicket if it turns out you are wrong.

That aside, I may not acknowledge that the Jolly Green Giant plays a particularly important role in my life, but I will the moment I am dead and he is no longer giving me all those wonderful frozen veggies.

[trueseeker]

AtheistArchon asked:
-Additionally, we have (yet again) the old canard that people actually wouldn't be happy in heaven if they were "sinners"... as if hell is suddenly a pleasant place to be, and heaven is undesireable. Not only does this (if true) make biblical morality 100% arbitrary and meaningless (because it removes both the carrot and the stick, the two motivators behind that particular arcane concept), and not only does it have no biblical support that I'm aware of, it also makes heaven and hell equal in terms of "pleasantness". Why bother achieving heaven if you're going to be eternally happy either way?

My response:
First let me say, I agree with you that the traditional view of an eternal hell with eternal torment isn't a just sentence for finite sins. My belief in God includes believing that He is just, fair, merciful and loving. I believe all His judgements--sentences will be clearly just and fair for all to see, and that no one will despute them, because they will be exactly what is called for in every case. BTW, I think many of the Theologians who come up with doctrines that make God look unjust and unloving and cause people to reject God, becase of the way they have portayed Him. May end up receiving greater judgements against them than super criminals like Hilter and Stalin. Also the phoney preachers that claim to represent God, that cause people to reject God, because they see through their hypocricy and motives, they will also receive a extremely harsh judgement.

I previously wrote what you responsed to, that I don't believe sinners would be happy living in the kingdom of heaven. Because I believe it is built and meant for those who are willing to let God change their hearts into the image of His. So that we desire and love the same things He does. Those who don't love being His servants, worshipping Him, loving others the way He loves others--wouldn't fit in, wouldn't like the place and shouldn't be there to ruin it for those God made for it.

But I didn't say sinners will enjoy Hell, it won't be pleasent to be judged to spend some time in Hell in torment. But God has promised us justice, referring to evil acts God says, "I will repay". As Christians we don't have to try to get justice to happen in this life, because God will recompense justice on the judgement day. How much evil each person has done to hurt others will be brought back to them. And if they have also done good deeds, that will be figured into their sentence. 'Justice will be merciless to those who have shown no mercy'. Those who have shown some mercy will get some mercy. Those who did little evil will have little sentences and those who did great evil will have great sentences of torment in Hell. When the judgements are completed, Hell will be thrown into the Lake of Fire and destroyed, there will no longer be any need for it. Revelations 20:12-15

And then those who weren't willing to submit to our Creator and allow Him to make them into His image, will also be thrown into the Lake of Fire. Not for further torment, but to be unmade. The scriptures call it the 'second death'. The first death being when we died to this physical universe and the second death being when the soul (spirit, heart and mind) cease to exist.

[Dr T]

I can't see how any Christian would enjoy the sufferings of others and actually be a Christain at all. How can you love your neighbour (regardless of what or who that neighbour is) yet be happy to see them suffer. How can we say forgive our sins,as we forgive those commited against us, if we want to see the sinner suffer?
Also the Bible doesn't say everyone goes to either Heavan or Hell, most will just not be raised to eternal life, their existance will end when they die.

[Solly]

As seer pointed out somewhere else, quoting C S Lewis, one day you and I and everybody will either be a creature so glorious, that now we would bow down and worship if we saw such; or a creature so hideous we would cringe now. If you think of your granny as she is now, suffering torment and God's wrath, then obviously you would be repulsed. But then, they shall be as they really are in all their sinful corruption, and rebellion against God, with all pleasing concommitants removed as God removes his grace.

Quoted above: The lake of fire is the second death.

This does not necessarily imply annihilation. The Lake of Fire can as easily signify God's Wrath, and the immersion of sinners in it, and all the powers that opposed God.
Can judgment and damnation be eternal? Yes. Because of the sins? No; rather because of who has been sinned against.
Note the different sentences that are handed down against people who commit manslaughter, murder as crime de passion, pre-meditated murder, child murder, cop killer, president assassinator. The punishment is adjusted to fit the crime, or else there would be a standard tariff for all murder. Similarly, if a crime is committed against an infinite God, then what is the tariff?
If one says that finite sins cannot possibly result in eternal punishment, then one could as easily say that a finite act of faith in Christ cannot bring eternal rewards and communion with God, and so we also have no hope.

As to how I would react. I don't know frankly. I am still more than half a sinner, who wants God to overlook my peccadillos from time to time, and let me off the hook. So obviously my views would not be entirely in line with his. One day they will. Ask me then - if I can see you down there Jimbo , I'll answer.


slly5

[Alien]

Hello Solly, I haven't spoken to you before. I'm a Brit too, but living in the US.

Yesterday @ 03:21 AM post located here
Solly:
Can judgment and damnation be eternal? Yes. Because of the sins? No; rather because of who has been sinned against.
Note the different sentences that are handed down against people who commit manslaughter, murder as crime de passion, pre-meditated murder, child murder, cop killer, president assassinator. The punishment is adjusted to fit the crime, or else there would be a standard tariff for all murder. Similarly, if a crime is committed against an infinite God, then what is the tariff?

I don't see how this applies. Manslaughter is a lesser crime because killing was not intended. Crime de passion is an odd French idea that we need not consider. Pre-meditated murder is punished more severely because it is pre-meditated. All these have nothing to do with the status of the victim.

Child murder and cop murder are punished more severely because we want to discourage them; child murder because we have a natural tendency to protect children and cop murder in an attempt to make it less attractive to kill cops than to run away. Killing Presidents I would lump in with cop killing. We want to discourage it because it has a huge effect on us all.

None of these reasons has anything to do with status or importance of the victim - just practical considerations. In fact, should we value a President higher than a street person for any other reason but those I have suggested? Isn't everyone entitled to equal protection under the law?

You may say that God is different. If so, perhaps you can explain, as the analogy doesn't work. I could as easily suggest that as God cannot be hurt by us, then no punishment is due at all.

If one says that finite sins cannot possibly result in eternal punishment, then one could as easily say that a finite act of faith in Christ cannot bring eternal rewards and communion with God, and so we also have no hope.

And if one did, then one would be just as wrong, as both obviously do so result. But they can simply because in both cases God "makes it so". If you mean "should" in both cases, then that is a different argument, but in any case the two don't compare. The concept of justice need not apply to a gift. It definitely should apply to punishment.