An afterlife is one question.  An afterlife with God is another or without even.

To the Church which proposes the latter.

You make us look forward to Heaven and urge us to prefer it to this life. Yet if there are people in Hell suffering forever that should torment us in Heaven. You say that in Heaven we do not hate the damned but we are indifferent and just don't care. The person who does not care what happens to you is worse than the person who hates you. Your faith is evil.
You now say that the damned are in Hell against the will of God and stay there because they won't repent. In other words, they can repent but don't and won't. This doctrine is not in your Bible. It denies the justice of your God. Indeed, the Bible always says that it is God who sends to Hell and Jesus speaks as a judge, "Depart from me Ye cursed into the eternal fire prepared for the Devil and his angels. These shall depart into eternal punishment." If Hell is only for those who stubbornly refuse to go to Heaven and who won't leave Hell then Jesus wouldn't be speaking in such terms. It would mean that Hell is not punishment. A God who lets evil people enjoy Heaven forever is no better than one who does not punish but who can't do anything about people who don't want him. You know fine well the apostle Paul wrote with approval that God said that vengeance God's and God will repay. You don't have the honesty to preach this vengeful God any more and yet you claim your Bible is the word of God and he is the author. Your misrepresenting of Catholic doctrine is a trick to ply the unsuspecting.

You make the resurrection of Jesus Christ the centre of your faith. But this makes no sense. We have no clear first hand testimonies that Jesus rose. The witnesses never even went though a process of questioning. We do for other miracle claims - such as that something appeared at Fatima in 1917 - and you consider those of less importance and even optional for belief.

Indeed it is obvious from the gospels that Jesus Christ disapproved of investigations. He claimed he did exorcisms and healings and ordered the people to recognise them as signs but made no effort to consult with physicians or professionals. It would have been very easy to get them to approve the events as miracles. It was a pre-scientific age. But his not deploying them implies that you must accept people's word for it if a miracle has been reported. Imagine the chaos and trouble that would lead to! Didn't the Inquisition think that if an accused heretic held burning coals and didn't burn that he was innocent and guilty if he got burned? That is what the miracle mentality does.

Jesus proclaimed his resurrection as the one sure sign that he was from God. He did these miracles before the resurrection. This underlines the fact that he did not allow investigation. You make it a law that miracles and apparitions should be investigated when they are popularly believed. But you only investigate them and declare them "worthy of belief" if their doctrines agree with the doctrines of the Church and the bishops. So any miracle that contradicts your faith you ignore it. Then you dare to say that there are signs and wonders verifying the Catholic faith! You are sifting the evidence. You are making up your mind before looking at the evidence. You are dishonest. Your signs and wonders do not encourage virtue in you. No good God would demean himself to perform such works.



No Copyright