Q&A: Answer as to why I condemn Hell and the unjust God according to conscience and follow a true justice above the unjust God's "justice"

Short introduction: You would not damn or allow your own children to be damned or tormented on earth for all eternity or even for a time in insufferable torments, neither would earthly justice accept such a thing but they would persecute you if you did such a thing and the whole world would have hated the evil you did (and many would even have hated you for the evil you did even though we should love and forgive) -- hence from this can be concluded that human justice is above God's justice on this point since no human judge or just person would condemn another human being or soul to such unmerciful torments and damnation, and it also shows that our conscience and that of others disapproves of this. However, when it comes to God, these rules are suddenly forgotten and God gets away with being an eternal dictator who condemns and allows to be condemned his own children (which is our brothers and sisters and fathers and mothers and children and neighbours) and no one says a thing and everyone just accepts it without complaining and remain silent. (Mostly atheists and such complain rightly and justly, and some Protestants who deny Hell, and also some doubting Christians, whether Catholic or Orthodox but that is about it.) Well, I will remain silent no more, but I will gladly and willingly fight for true justice and conscience, which even goes above God's own laws. No law is a just or true law if it is unjust, and who can argue against that Hell is unjust? Only pre-programmed Christians who do not dare to question God, the Bible, the Church or the Saints, will somehow excuse themselves with that Hell is just even though they themselves would never have damned anyone however much they hated each other, since they know in their conscience it is evil to wish or allow (without hindering it) eternal evil upon others!

According to Wikipedia, the "Golden Rule" (which even God himself teaches in his Bible) teaches this: "The Golden Rule is the principle of treating others as one's self would wish to be treated. It is a maxim that is found in many religions and cultures." "Therefore, whatever you want people to do for you, do the same for them, because this summarizes the Law and the Prophets." (Matthew 7:12) Too bad the hypocrite God does not follow his own rules and laws about doing good upon his own enemies and other people, such as the damned: "But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven." (Matthew 5:44-45) If you who are reading this were damned, you would not like to be damned nor would you like to remain damned, neither would you like the concept of being forced to hate. Why then do you think damnation is just, if this really is your position? What is just with being forced to hate through being tormented with insufferable torments and fire and by being deprived of all hope, happiness and love? There is no justice with Hell! Hell is evil! And a God who allows damnation or sends his own children there to be tormented forever just because he wishes so because they died in his "displeasure", is evil, not only according to me, but also according to your own and everyones conscience*, and also according to all human law and justice!

*If you and they are honest, that is, which can be hard if you fear men, "God", hell and damnation for standing up against an injustice, even if it be God that teaches this injustice. Should a man fear God or to follow his conscience or an eternal justice above God's "justice" and "conscience" when God himself teaches an obvious injustice and wishes eternal evil upon those whom we wish to see saved? No! Therefore, fear not, and neither fear damnation, for no one will be damned for wishing good upon his neighbour.

Now unto the email and my response.

Nataly Ferreira: “Doubt...and worried. Save Mary. I read the last article of the site, and I was confused and worried. Clarify my doubt, what happened to Jerome? Has He renounced true FAITH? and adhered to the Vatican ii.? Is God a bad person now? Could you please explain to me what really happened to Jerome? because I'm Brazilian and I need to translate the texts for me to understand. and I was shocked by the last article. or did I understand and misinterpret? Awaiting return.

Jerome: Would you think you were a good person if you damned your own children in the worst torments possible always and for all eternity just because you wanted to do so, and they died in your displeasure?

If you would be bad for doing such a deed of damning your children to unmerciful torments (or if you simply allowed this to happen without hindering it), why would not God also be bad? It is false and wrong and hypocritical to judge God different from yourself or from your brother and sister. If you are evil and bad for condemning and damning or allowing to be damned and tormented your own children unmercifully, then so is God.

I think I have expressed my self clearly in the previous post, but much more will be said about it in the future.

Is it really hard to believe that Mary will have Her will in the end and save all her Children? or that all children will become good in the end and hence Hell will be unnecessary? If God gave Mary power over even himself, why would She allow damnation to exist when it is an evil thing and She could will it not to be? Why would The Blessed Virgin Mary not overrule God and his Hell doctrine when a Hell is evil and unmerciful? Does a mother like Her own children to be tormented always and for all eternity? Of course not. Therefore, know for certain that there will be no Hell in the end, since Mary will claim all her children for herself and save them.

Is it hard to believe that God wants us to follow our conscience even if we get persecuted for it? or that Hell is a test to see who wants to be truly just and follow his conscience (of not wishing or desiring or accepting such eternal evils upon others), even condemning God if need to be, in order to truly follow justice and our conscience, which condemns doing evil upon others? It is not hard to see that this may be the case, since the true God is said to be in our conscience.

I know the “God” we suppose is “our God”, the Bible and the Church judges you a heretic unless you accept Hell and damnation, but is it hard to see that it would be an honor, and something honorable, if you were really condemned for this reason (not that damnation is a good thing): i.e., that you wanted to do more good than God himself and save even the damned from torments which they cannot bear? I also explained myself clearly that no one will be damned for wanting to save all souls (you may believe in this if you want), or even if you fought with God about Hell and that he must stop damning souls, since it is an evil doctrine to damn someone or let them live in unbearable torments. You know in your conscience that it is an evil thing to let others live in unhappiness, without love, without hope and with insufferable torments, such as in a sea of fire. Yet this is supposedly the punishment God allows to be inflicted upon the damned.

Why does not God himself follow the “Golden Rule” of doing good unto others, of doing unto others as he himself would like others do unto him? Does God himself want to be damned and live in eternal torments and unhappiness, or would he like to have hope?

I can easily believe that Hell is just a test. Conscience is true, and our conscience condemns a Hell or that we should be doing, allowing or wishing eternal evils upon others.

There is a reason for why God, the Bible and saints tell us to follow our conscience, or why Vatican II happened. When we are not forced anymore to strictly follow the Old Church doctrine, it is easier to follow our conscience. (The Old Church doctrine and pre-modern world restricted people from following their conscience due to the fact that they just blindly had to follow or submit to whatever the Church taught them, otherwise they would have been punished, excommunicated, or worse, burned at the stake.) If we had lived before in time, we would have been forced to embrace the Church's position on many things -- today it is different, since many other positions is being taught and embraced (even by the Church, if you accept Vatican II as the true Church, that is) and the world have become different, especially thanks to media, which have united people around the world in thinking and wishing good upon others.

In short, if God truly damns souls for all eternity in torments only because he desires this and never forgives, and if there is truly no hope, then yes, he is evil on this point without a doubt. And I think you would agree with this easily, or at least you would easily do so if I was the person who punished someone in this way, but then this only shows how people judge men different from God himself, which is hypocritical and false and against true justice -- for if you judge me evil for doing this or for punishing my brother or sister or father or mother or children in this way, then so is God evil for doing the same or worse, and I will gladly die with this opinion -- and then both you and I and God will see who is right in the judgment. I can clearly see an honor in my position, since I want to do more good then God himself since I despise eternal damnation and I wish all souls be saved from my heart -- and I suppose even you agree with this. Otherwise you judge men different from God, but doing so is unjust. To just excuse oneself with that God is God and that we just must submit and be blind, even if what he does is evil, is itself evil and wrong.

However, I do not condemn anyone as evil for not condemning God, since I understand it is a long process to make in changing position, and I also understand the fear of being damned and of loosing the grace of God, and of Mary and their friendship. But I can assure you, you will not loose their friendship if you fight against God on this point, rather, you will gain their love and especial friendship, since you show true love for their (supposedly) dammed children.

If God only made a Hell as a test in order to make people fear and serve him, that is excusable, and then he was not evil in the sense if he really wished this evil upon others, but his doctrine led to much evil nonetheless (such as bad consciences and the evil opinion that damnation is just or that it is just to torment one's own children in insufferable torments and fire just because God said so), but this Hell have also led to much good, such as people loving souls and wanting to save them from the bottom of their hearts. I can believe God wanted to make this happen, i.e, wanted to draw out this goodness in people. The thought of damnation also helps many live a more moral life, obviously.

In short: if I damned my own children or tormented them without wanting to forgive them, and without wanting to be merciful to them (such as denying them love, hope and happiness for all eternity) then you would easily and infallibly condemn me as evil, as a terrorist, as a mortal sinner, as unworthy etc. But when it comes to God himself who in actually does this to our brothers and sisters (which is his own children nonetheless!), then all is “well”, he is “good” and “holy” and “lovable”, even though, in truth, he is the worst of terrorist and a hypocrite that damns and torments his own children and allows this to happen without hindering it.

Sure, God is lovable and such, and I have experienced his sweetness and love (and still does) but his Hell doctrine have made me fall away from him considerably (with justice) since I don't find him the most worthy to receive my worship. The Blessed Virgin Mary and the Saints have taken his place, and it is Her!!, Gemma!!, Theresa!!, Rose of Lima!!, Birgitta!!, St. Philomena! and Mechtilde!, Eva!, Catharine of Sienna!, Catharine of Sweden!, Catharine of America! (the native Indian), Mary Magdalene!! (Oh Mary Magdalene, help to me to love you even more as you deserve, as I did before when I thought more of you, before I fell away from you and do not any longer think of you as much!), Saint Rita! and Zita! and Gertrude the Great!, among many others, I love and worship the most. Not that Mary was God or was for all eternity (but perhaps She is the true God or will become God by taking God's place? but has not revealed it or come to know it yet?), but I believe that Mary (or someone else who must rule in God's place -- even if this person is not God -- in order to avoid something as terrible as Hell ever to happen again) may take this so-called God's place, since God is unworthy of his Godhood or power, which he abuses. Mary is more good than even God himself (that is why it is Mary that save souls in Catholic examples, and why God shamelessly complains about how he wants to damn* this soul Mary desires to save), so wouldn't it be fitting then that God renounces his Godhood, and gives this to Mary? I think so! (As I explained in the previous article, when a person does evil in the world and is a danger to others, then is this person punished in such ways so that he can inflict no more evil upon others. For the same reason it is only just that God be entirely deprived of his powers, so that he can no more hurt anyone for all eternity by inflicting unjust punishments, such as Hell.)

*I also want to add that it is possible such scenarios recorded between God, Mary and a soul wishing to save a sinner may be a lovable play in order to make people wish and desire the salvation of souls. God may play reluctant, but in the end, he gives way to Mary's pleas and pardons the sinner that was about to be damned.

The law of conscience demands that you judge God truly and justly in the same way as you judge other men, therefore, if you follow your conscience, you would have to condemn God for the evil he does. Otherwise, you become a hypocrite.

If you believe what I have written, you can believe that God has changed his potion, and that there will be no Hell since he has admitted that he was wrong in his thought about Hell. That is one explanation I have received even from Himself, if you dare to believe in my explanation, that is. (I have also thought about that he never created Hell but only scares us with it in order to make us wish to love and save souls and live a more godly and moral life.)

It is easy to believe that God himself is or was unperfect even from the beginning, why else did he want his own children to be damned and live in insufferable torments? Why did God make such an unjust judgment as eternal damnation when all justice on earth abhors and condemns such an injustice? Is men more just than God? Hence, if God is truly just (as he claims) then it is only natural he would be converted and that he would humble himself.

It is also easy to believe that Hell would cease to exist eventually even if God did not humble himself since Mary is in Heaven, and since she is more good than God Mary would have forced God to submit in the end, since She wants to save the souls God's terrible "justice" wants to condemn. It is my belief that Mary will wish away even Hell, and that She has done so already.

Mary have received the power to overrule God for a reason, and we will see in the last judgment why that is. I believe with Origen, Hell will cease to be and that is mainly because of Mary (and those who wanted this doctrine to cease) because they will make God change his position.

But even without Mary, if God is just, he would have to humble himself also and cease condemning because it is evil to follow one's own opinion or justice above other peoples just justice. If men or men in the world don't condemn or damn forever, why would God be allowed to do so? It won't happen. God would be evil and unjust if he made himself an eternal dictator and just ignored other people's opinion about forgiveness and how to punish. If God is just, he needs to follow also human justice (in what they teach rightly), and one such justice is that one should not torment someone unmercifully. There is death penalty in the world but also hope in a good afterlife, but no torments. And even in prison, there is love, happiness, friendship, hope and a good life available to you, if you desire to live a moral life.

So no, I have not renounced the true faith but rather found it and embraced it, since the true faith, even according to God himself, is the Golden Rule and wishing (and wanting) good upon others, and forgiving others, especially our enemies! That is why I want to forgive the damned and work for their eternal salvation and happiness. I do not believe, as I explained, that the damned cannot be good or forgiven. If they hate God or can't forgive him, it is for a reason -- i.e., He rejected them and sent them to Hell. If they can't love God or God love them, then let someone else love them or give them love or be their God (such as Mary, or whomever else has won this title), and all would be well. It is absurd to think that a spirit or soul would refuse happiness and love for all eternity just because we have been taught this is the case. If this is not true with reasonable humans, why would it be true with spirits? It makes no sense. But even if this is true, my judgment would be to send them to earth again and live another life and make them receive a body. No human wants to deny love or live in torments, hence, it is easy to see why there are solutions to the damned and that they can start to love again. That is why I believe in love and forgiveness, and not in hate and God's evil damnation.

I can write much more. If there is anything, please let me know.

I hope this helps and that all is well with you, that you are happy over life (which is a gift), and that you think well about others and have hope in the afterlife with eternal happiness and joy with our beloved dear and loved ones, but also with our neighbour and brother and sister in those whom we do not yet know, but whom we will then start to know!

Sincerely, and may God Bless you!

Ville Hietanen (Jerome)

ProphecyFilm.com

DoomsdayTube.com

UPDATE

For my response to Nataly to my email, see this article:

https://against-all-heresies-and-errors.blogspot.com/2019/05/q-why-damnation-and-eternal-torments-is-evil.html

Why the Catholic God is Evil and Unjust. Why Hell is Evil. Why All Souls Will be Saved in the End!

If you want my immediate response, see below his question. And yes, I condemn God, Hell and also prove why all souls will be saved in the end. In short: The injustice of God (i.e., Hell) was only a test to see who would follow their conscience (of not just being God's slave by allowing him to do anything (such as eternal evil)), and who would not (i.e., those who would follow their conscience (and the golden rule of wishing good upon others as upon themselves) which says that they do not want their own children to be damned and hence, they don't want eternal damnation to exist or that anyone should be damned.)

St. Bridget's Revelations ch 41

Eli: Have you read Book 3 Chapter 26? I'm going to paste half of the chapter here in the email for the sake of convenience and highlight what I personally think are kind of problematic for EENS. It's confusing because in the same chapter our Lord affirms EENS multiple times. I would really like to know what your take on this is.

Bold: borderline heretical

Underlined: EENS

However, now I can complain that I am little praised and unknown to many people, because everyone is following his own will but few follow mine. Be you steadfast and humble, and do not exalt yourself in your mind if I show you other people's trials, and do not betray their names unless you are instructed to do so. Their trials are not shown to you to shame them but in order that they may be converted and come to know God's justice and mercy. Nor should you shun them as condemned, for even if I should say today that a certain person is wicked, should he call on me tomorrow with contrition and a will to improve, I am prepared to forgive him. And that person whom I yesterday called wicked, today, due to his contrition, I declare him to be so dear a friend of mine that if his contrition remains steadfast, I forgive him not only his sin but even remit the punishment of sin.

You might understand this with a metaphor. It is as though there were two drops of quicksilver and both were heading toward each other in haste. If nothing but a single atom remained to keep them from joining, still God would be powerful enough to prevent them from coming together. Likewise, if any sinner were so rooted in diabolical deeds that he was standing at the very brink of destruction, he could still obtain forgiveness and mercy, if he called upon God with contrition and a will to improve. Now, given that I am so merciful, you might ask why I am not merciful toward pagans and Jews, some of whom, if they were instructed in the true faith, would be ready to lay down their lives for God. My response is that I have mercy on everyone, on pagans as well as Jews, nor is any creature beyond my mercy. 

Edit: This I interpret as lesser punishment, not salvation.

With leniency and mercy I will judge both those people who, learning that their faith is not the true one, fervently long for the true faith, as well as those people who believe the faith they profess to be the best one, because no other faith has ever been preached to them, and who wholeheartedly do what they can.

Edit: This also, lesser punishment, not necessarily salvation.

You see, there is a double judgment, namely the one for those to be condemned and the one for those to be saved. The sentence of condemnation for Christians will have no mercy in it. To them will belong eternal punishment and shadows and a will hardened against God. The sentence for those Christians to be saved will be the vision of God and glorification in God and goodwill toward God.

Excluded from these rewards are pagans and Jews as well as bad and false Christians. Although they did not have the right faith, they did have conscience as their judge and believed that the one whom they worshipped and offended was God.

But the ones whose intention and actions were and are for justice and against sin will, along with the less bad Christians, share a punishment of mercy in the midst of sufferings due to their love of justice and their hatred of sin. However, they will not have consolation in the service of glory and of the vision of God. They will not behold him due to their lack of baptism, because some temporal circumstance or some hidden decision of God made them draw back from profitably seeking and obtaining salvation. If there was nothing that held them back from seeking the true God and being baptized, neither fear nor the effort required nor loss of goods or privileges, but only some impediment that overcame their human weakness, then I, who saw Cornelius and the centurion while they were still not baptized, know how to give them a higher and more perfect reward in accordance with their faith.

Edit: this could be interpreted as God will supernaturally supply baptism.

One thing is the ignorance of sinners, another that of those who are pious but impeded. Likewise, too, one thing is the baptism of water, another that of blood, another that of wholehearted desire.

Edit: This is where my main gripe with the chapter lies.

God, who knows the hearts of all people, knows how to take all of these circumstances into account. I am begotten without beginning, begotten eternally from the beginning. I was born in time at the end of times. From the commencement I have known how to give individual persons the rewards they deserve and I give to each according as he deserves. Not the least little good done for the glory of God will go without its reward. This is why you should give many thanks to God that you were born of Christian parents in the age of salvation, for many people have longed to obtain and see that which is offered to Christians and yet have not obtained it.”

Jerome: It seems as it speaks of baptism of desire. The Church has always spoken in favor of this doctrine, and Popes, Catechisms, Code of Canon laws, Doctors of the Church, Saints, and all Theologians, etc. have all confirmed this doctrine. Yet, along comes MHFM and denies it, and many follow their lead. I personally incline to the majorities' position, and I haver started to distance my self from positions which contradicts the majorities' position.

I can understand the argument that to think they have all been wrong - is heretical. It is prideful.

Just as protestants misinterprets the bible, so it is easy to understand that people such as MHFM misinterprets dogmas etc. Or do you think they know better then all Saints, and all Theologians? It does not matter if their arguments seem strong or sound, because protestants argument also seem strong and sound. Even so, one can believe in baptism of desire and blood without being a heretic, since this position is allowed by the Church (since it is thought in the Church!), therefore, it is evil to condemn others for adhering to this doctrine.

That is why I have started to embrace baptism of desire and blood, since it leads to more souls being saved. Hence, one can be converted at the point of death and receive the faith, if this is needed, and be saved. So pagans, atheists etc. both can and will be saved, provided they have a good will in seeking God in their heart, as this Revelation indicates.

By the way, eternal hell is evil, and since Vatican II teaches that almost all are saved, I have also started to be inclined to this position. I can honestly believe that Vatican II is not an apostasy, but enlightenment. Do you not see how utterly evil and stupid it is to call "salvation" apostasy, heresy and evil? There are bad fruits of Vatican II, but that almost all people shall be saved are not one of them. So the pre-Vatican II Church which condemns almost the whole world (if one must be Catholic in the strict sense) was good, but Vatican II which opened up salvation for the entire human race, was evil? So good is evil and evil good?

There can be nothing more evil then Hell, and to think that a "good" God created it, or sends his own children there to suffer always, is itself a mortal sin and a heresy. - This just made me think of Gnostics and their belief that God is evil. Not that I agree that he was evil for the arguments they used, but rather, it is easy to see that God is evil because of the Hell he allows to exist. Had the Gnostics condemned God because he condemns souls (because he do evil and breaks the golden law -- i.e., do good unto others as you wan't others to do good unto you) they would have won the day. I mean, how can an honest soul argue that there is justice with eternal torments? Only mislead and brainwashed souls that do not follow a justice above God's "justice", would believe that. Human justice is way more just than God's justice in many ways, and that is why God's will shall be done on earth as well as in heaven.

Who is God? He who also follows the human laws, obviously, and who is not a dictator. Hence, the God we think is God is probably not God, or was undeserving of this title. Or perhaps this true God that is truly just has not come to existence yet, or is hiding, in order to see who wants to be truly just and not just being a slave. Perhaps Mary is God, or will become God, since she already receives her will always from God. It is not heresy to call Mary God, with the belief that the "God" we think is God is already evil and undeserving. If God can do all things, then he could even loose His Godhood and give this to another being. Even human justice would strip God of all his powers and imprison him, so that he never - for all eternity - could hurt another human beings/souls again.

Believe it or not, but I have had revelations about that Hell will cease to exist (or that it has already, since the Blessed Virgin Mary willed this in cooperation with all those who also wanted this), and that God will humble himself eventually, admitting that he was evil in creating it and sending humans, souls, even small children there to be tormented always (so God is also a child abuser and child murderer! really, you cannot think enough evil of a "God" who damns souls, and you commit no sin even for condemning and hating him and the evil he has done, rather, if you don't condemn him, you may sin and become a coward, since you know in your conscience he deserves condemnation). If it is one point worthy to be condemned for, or to be called heretical for, is the position that all souls shall be saved, or that atheists or pagans shall be saved etc.

So someone condemns you for wanting souls to be saved, such as by an evil God and brainwashed Church? What an honor! We do more good than they, yet they condemn us? Hypocrites! Stop being brainwashed! Stop follow a dictator! That is why we must follow our conscience. God is also in our conscience - perhaps there is some truth to collective consciousness, or whatever those other religions teach. I can understand Vatican II's teaching that there is truth in other religions. All truths have not been understood yet, such as who the true God is. "Catholic" he is though, but only because he is truly universal! which the Catholic God is not! - Yet, I condemned Francis for making this statement, even though I now clearly see that he was right (I have much to correct on our homepages).

"Our" Catholic God is not Catholic, since he only cares about his own in the end. Why else does he not save them (the "damned"), or forgive them even if they died in a "deadly sin"? If I was God, I would do all in my power that no one would be damned, even if they died in "deadly sin". I mean it! What would be a simple solution that the criminal God did not do? He could simply look the other way and say or think to a soul: "You did not die in a deadly sin, because I do not judge the sin to be deadly in a way to deserve eternal punishments." If someone deserves punishment because they truly did evil, they could go to purgatory, which is temporal. If only a person wants, he could think of several reasons as to why God would not have to damn a soul, and why that soul could be excused instead. Yet, the dictator God did nothing of it because of his stupid own "justice", which he thinks precedes or exceeds eternal or human justice. Wrong! As on earth so in heaven! And human justice do not judge as you do.

Would you want an atheist to be damned just because he was an atheist? Or a pagan, just because he was pagan - even if he was evil? You know the truth in your conscience - you do not want this, since you do not want this evil against yourself or your own children.

There is no justice with eternal hell, and Christians have only been brainwashed to look the other way since they fear God or don't want to be damned themselves. Honor to the man that condemns God in his face and calls him evil, and that prays to Mary with all their heart that there shall be no Hell and that all shall be saved. Why does God teach that Mary always gets her Will? Because she is more merciful, and hence more just! That is why Catholic examples of souls being saved is attributed to the Virgin Mary, and not to God or Jesus, since Jesus rather often receives the eternal shame spot of having wanted to damn the soul Mary wished to save! Hence, if we pray that there will be no Hell, she will have Her Will (which is our will), even if God does not want it. Even if God is evil, The Virgin Mary is not. If God don't want the damned as his children or forgive them, we will, and we will have them as our own and they will be forgiven!

There is an honor to live one's life hating and condemning God for his evil doctrine of Hell, and not a shame. Rather, it is a shame to live one's life thinking that there is a Hell and that people deserve it, or that there is justice in it. No judge on earth would ever condemn someone to such an unjust punishment, yet God is allowed to be an eternal and evil dictator? No, won't happen. God will fall in the end, and we (who hate God because of his Hell but still wants to love him and forgive him) and the Virgin Mary will have Our Will, and She will have all her children as she desires, in happiness and salvation. That is why God gave Mary all men as her children, since God himself was unworthy of this. That is why God himself admits in his evil bible (which contains a lot of evil such as hell but also good such as golden rules which he himself don't follow) that he don't look upon the damned as his children. They where not his to be since he wanted them evil. Even on earth bad parents are deprived of their children, so we can see a justice in that God suffers a loss of not having them as his own, even though he must be loved, since without love there will only be evil.

Even you know in your conscience that I have spoken true with all what I have said above, yet if you fear, you must be led astray by the bible, and the Church to excuse God (a true and evil dictator - and who is worse than satan himself - who condemns his own children to insufferable torments for all eternity) and believe that eternal torments is just and hence condemn men. At least desire all men and souls to be saved even if you are unsure if this will be the case, and you will be doing a good deed and have a good thought.

It is evil to think that someone deserves Hell, or that there is justice in it. This is the mystery with the last judgment, that God will not have his will, but Mary will rather, and those of Her children that wanted Her will - to save all of her Children. Origen thought correct, there will be universal salvation in the end.

I hope you understand. It is an honor to be condemn by God, by the Church and the Bible over something as unjust as Hell. Think of it yourself. You fought with God and his Bible and his Church in this life because you wanted souls to be saved, and even strove to eradicate this heresy and to apply universal salvation for all, even to the most evil and "undeserving" (note: nothing can be more undeserving than eternal punishments, especially in torments, and no one deserves such punishments, since a person, however evil, needs love to become good), yet, when you come before God, you will be "damned" because you wanted more good then him? Can't you see that this is a contradiction? and that it will be God himself who will fall before your feet since you have become more just and good on this point then him! All can see that it would be evil for you to be condemned, and Mary would not allow it, because you wanted souls to be save and because you condemned an unjust God.

Follow your conscience. Your conscience do not want a Hell, or that someone deserves such a punishment (yet according to blind Saints and the evil Bible, almost all souls are damned and yet no one has ever thought anything about it but that it is just in some way, because God said so! That is why souls who blindly follow God, do not follow their conscience and why they lost on this point; and even though God made them saints, they will not be saints on this point for failing to follow their conscience). Your conscience also says that it is evil to damn and punish too much, hence, God is evil if he really hold these positions of eternal torments and insufferable torments that is so severe (according to his saints) that not even all punishments on earth can give an indication of them.

It is easy to see and believe that the doctrine of Hell was taught by God as a test to see who dared to condemn him for once and follow their conscience and not just being his slave allowing him to do and believe in anything he wills however evil, such as eternal torments for dying in even one "deadly sin", such as masturbation (if they believed it was a deadly sin, that is...) Otherwise, masturbation is not a deadly sin if you do not believe it is a deadly sin. That is how conscience works. But then there is disobedience if you don't follow the rules of the Church, if you consider yourself Catholic, since they disallow masturbation. But again, disobedience is neither a deadly sin, unless you believe it is, because men have a free will for a reason, and they can make choices to follow their free will with a good conscience.

Eli: Almost every line in this email [above] contradicts you're website. I don't know where this sudden change in heart came from but I pray that you be delivered from whatever is blinding you.

Jerome: So it is blindness to want souls to be saved? But to embrace positions which damns most souls, is to see clearly?

No, my friend, it is you do not have the courage to break free from this enslavement system that is blinding you. Vatican II is more right than you think, and in due time, they might even teach that there is no Hell or that all will be saved absolutely.

I have expressed myself clearly. The change in my heart happened because I know in my conscience that Hell is the most evil that has ever existed. A true God, a good God, cannot have created a Hell or obstinately choose to send souls there for all eternity. That is why I have come to understand that this God, is not actually the true Catholic God, since he is not universal. The true God is in our consciences, and God wants us to follow our conscience.

What happens when we follow our conscience? Then we desire good upon others, such as that all souls shall be saved. A person who follows his conscience will see that Hell is evil, and that there is something wrong with this doctrine. A person who follows his conscience, and the Golden Rule (do good unto others as you want them do unto you) will see that God, who damns souls or allows them to be damned eternally, is evil if he does not change his position, and that Hell is unjust, and that it must cease to be.

I have been told many times that the God we thought was God (or was God) has lost his Godhood place in Heaven due to this injustice and that someone more just will take his place, and that Hell has already ceased to be and that all souls will be saved, although with different degrees of glory. That all people can live like one happy family is the ultimate goal and happiness, and if even one soul would be damned, there would not be perfection.

You also understand that it is evil to condemn one's own child, and you would not do this. Yet you excuse and defend a God who obstinately damns billions of souls without reason, other than that they died in his displeasure? If I was God, I would forgive all men, and make them love. If we have all eternity, even the most evil will be converted in the end. One can always learn to love with love, but one cannot learn to love with hate and torments. That is why Hell is unjust, since it takes away all chances of being converted.

If God does not want the damned or forgive them, let me have them! I will forgive them, and save them, and let them live in happiness in my soul if God rejects them. But I am sure Mother Mary will save them, as in fact, she already has. May we all live in her Holy Womb!

https://www.cathinfo.com/general-discussion/why-the-catholic-god-is-evil-and-unjust-why-hell-is-evil

[After posting the above [first] post in CathInfo, a small discussion ensued before I was finally banned. The responses posted here, or the post above in its entirety, cannot be seen in the above thread link.]

Stubborn: Very screwed up OP. :facepalm: I will just say that hell lasts forever because God, being eternal, lasts forever. Therefore, if hell did not last forever, then sinners would have beaten God, sinners would be getting away with offending God if they were to ever be let out.

Jerome: It is ironic how you call me "screwed up" because I advocate salvation for my brethren and sisters. What is screwed up with that? No, rather, what is screwed up is to defend an evil God who condemns his own children.

Did you read my post? Probably not! Read it, and see what it says, then come back with some arguments.

The argument that God wants damnation and that's it, and therefore, we must accept it, is ridiculous because you don't even want damnation to exist. You only believe in it through force.

The argument that hell lasts forever because God lasts forever is also irrelevant. I mean, what is that for excuse for damning anyone? If God don't want to forgive the damned or let them live in happiness, let me have all the damned, let me forgive them, and let them live in my soul in happiness.

Just because God lives forever, does not mean an eternal injustice must be!

Sinners have not beaten God if Hell does not exist. Rather, God would have beaten himself up if Hell exists forever, since that would mean God would be unjust. Not even one just judge on earth would damn anyone to eternal punishment for whatever crime on earth. To think that God should be a dictator and damn souls only because he wishes so - is evil to the max. No one who is just would agree with his judgment, but rather try to depose him. That is why Mary will overrule God in the end, since she will have her will.

Sinners that have been forgiven from Hell and that have become good (or if there were no Hell) will have their just punishment even without an eternal Hell, such as loss of glory in Heaven or lesser rewards than those more just. However, since Heaven exists forever, everything should be able to be gained back, and more glory should be able to be attained. Therefore, no Hell needs to exist. Even a temporal punishment, such as purgatory, would be enough, instead of a Hell.

You say God would be offended if there was no Hell and his "damned" children were released? What offense is worse, that your own children, mom or dad or best friend are condemned to Hell (as they could be), or that God would be kind and forgiver sinners from Hell? If God forgave all sinners and they become good in the end and all were friends, no offense would be taken. So you see an offense that does not exist, only because you blindly and shamelessly want to defend God and his evil hell doctrine. If you follow your own conscience (that does not wish eternal evil on anyone) however, you would be following the true God. (Saints and Theologians teach God is in our conscience. I can understand why.)

The only offense would be if there was a Hell and if people where there. Think of yourself, stubborn, what if you where damned, or your mom, or dad, or best friend, or wife or children? That is an offense. You would not wish this eternal offense on anyone, much less on those you love or know, yet you still readily acknowledge Hell without actually thinking about the consequences, or whom might end up there.

If you where damned in the end (even if you where a "sinner"), I am sure you would wish to get out and be forgiven, since you would not want to be separated from those you love or live in insufferable pain eternally. Similarly, you would not wish your own parents, wife or children to be damned. So how would God be offended if they got out of Hell, if this would be the greatest happiness in reality, since it not only makes you eternally happy and gratuitous, but also makes God happy (if they could be saved and not be unjust, even according to his own laws? since he wants all to be saved, even if they don't according to his laws).

That is why this false God will fall in the judgment and the true hidden God take his place who wants men to follow their conscience, and all damned be saved, and why Origen and others like whim who taught universal salvation will be made right. The Virgin Mary will not let this injustice of eternally damning her and our children, brothers and sisters, mothers and fathers etc. be going on, and when she understands she can have Her will on this point, she will, and God will fall. There is a reason why God obeys Mary on every point, and why God gave Mary power even over himself.

Already, there is no Hell, as I understand it, but even if there is, Hell will cease to exists at the last judgment, as others teach.

One thing is clear from your post, stubborn, and that is that you do not follow your conscience but rather breaks it by excusing God and by remaining a slave to an evil brainwashing system and doctrine that you know is evil and unjust - for Hell is certainly unjust, as all judges on earth readily would admit (excluded from this are those judges who are forced to believe in Hell by being Christians, but even so, they would never have condemned anyone themselves to such a punishment, since they know it is eternally unjust).

Stubborn: God is not evil, men are evil. Every man is born into this world bent on evil due to being born with original sin. This is elementary Catholic doctrine. As Fr. Wathen puts it: [You need to] look at things as they are and stop all this liberal star gazing and wishful thinking and return to hard reality. Last week in what we style a sermon you probably perceive that I was laboring and I felt ill at ease because I could not find the words to say what I had thinking for a number of weeks and have a little more success said in other places. The bishops are going to have to recognize that the fundamental premise and the farfetched hope and the basic inspiration of the second Vatican council were altogether false and insubstantial.

They are going to have to recognize that liberalism is intrinsically false and will not work, because beneath liberalism, the philosophical basis of liberalism, is what we call naturalism. Naturalism proclaims, among other heresies, that there is no such thing as original sin, that man is basically good, that he means well and if you let him grow up, he’ll grow up good, he’ll grow up moral, he’ll grow up to be a good fellow.

But Catholic doctrine says that man is not basically good, that he comes into the world bent on evil and if you leave him to himself, he’ll become a savage, he’ll become amoral. He’ll not only do most wicked things but he will try to justify them.

We have to recognize that this is the error of liberalism, that it wants to treat all men as if they really are not bad and that the only reason they are bad is that they are misguided, that they’re victims of circumstances and of their environment.

That they are bad because their mother, or their father, or their parents mistreated them, or because they were deprived of something, or because they didn’t get a chance to go to school with white folk and all that kind of thing. And we say that no, a man is bad because of original sin and he doesn’t mind being bad, he chooses to be bad. In other words, he cannot blame his wickedness on Adam only, because with every day that passes, he confirms the evil within himself.

At the second Vatican council they tried to say that "men are bad, that men are anti-Catholic because the Church has not treated men correctly, and if the Church approached them kindly, and with understanding and you might say with intelligence, modern public relations - they would have come into the Church instead of opposing it" and being against us in every way and distrusting it and even engaging in efforts to destroy it."

And the bishops are going to have to recognize that original sin is operative in every soul and it always will be, and that all men have to be disciplined, they have to acknowledge that by themselves they will do wicked things. And Almighty God in the Church established an authority over them and they may not like to be told what to do but they must be told what to do and they must be warned of the consequences of not doing it, and the consequences ultimately are hell fire...

Jerome: If God truly wants souls to be eternally damned, then yes, he is evil on this point, just as I would be if I choose to torment my children while living on earth with insufferable torments just because they offended me or "died" in my displeasure. All judges would condemn such an evil father, and even you would hate him (the evil he did) and the world would hate him and be shocked at how evil he was.

Even if every man on earth is bent on evil, that does not justify an eternal punishment for failing to live up to God's standard.

Stubborn, you don't want yourself, or your mom or dad or wife or children to be damned, hence, you don't even like this doctrine but only believe in it through force. Hell is evil, hell is unjust, hell is illogical. Only love can heal, not hate and eternal punishments.

Stubborn, have you even read my posts at all?

The only one I find honest so far have been Matto, who also understand that hell is sad, tragic and evil. That is why he addressed the point somehow by admitting that God could be hated for this doctrine. All others here have only looked the other way around, ignoring the points, excusing God. That is because you have been brainwashed! Instead of following your conscience, and the Golden Rule, which teaches that one wishes good upon others and that all shall be saved, you excuse God and Hell and claim this unjust punishment is somehow just, when it clearly is not.

Only when or if you yourself are damned, or those you love, will you see your folly. Not that you should be damned or will be, since no on will damned in the end, but if you where damned or someone you loved, you might quickly change position and not think God so holy or innocent anymore, if he simply allows them to stay their when you desire their salvation.

What a hypocrite God would be if he himself lived an earthly life without him knowing he was God and he ended up damned! I can only see it just that God himself must live an earthly life (and Jesus is not the same, since he knew he was God) to see whether he would succeed or fail in this earthly test, otherwise he is a hypocrite. And if he was damned, yet remain in Heaven as God, he would be an even worse hypocrite since the "damned" can't be in Heaven according to him. Even if God would have been saved does not change the point that Hell is evil and that God is unjust for not having taken steps to prevent souls from being eternally damned. Any father or mother on earth knows in their conscience that they want their children well even if they are evil or disobedient. No parent want their children to live in eternal torments. That is natural. Yet God is so unnatural, contrary to human nature, that he wants to damn his own children for all eternity... This only shows that human nature and justice is more reasonable and just than spiritual "reason", "nature" and "justice", which seems rather governed by pride, self-love and excessive love for punishing.

God's plan in the end will fail. The Blessed Virgin Mary will look into it and have Her will.

CathInfo: Sorry unknown, you are banned from using this forum! Banned for explicit blasphemy against God, and heresy. This ban is not set to expire.

Jerome: So I was banned for wanting to save souls, and God was being defended once more for condemning souls.

The Vatican II Rite of Baptism for Adults and Children - "Is it valid?"

The Vatican II Rite of Baptism - for Adults and Children - "Is it valid?"

by Fr. Lucian Pulvermacher, OFM Cap.

---

In this study, I use the official books of the Novus Ordo Vatican II Church. The title is "The Rites of the Catholic Church" as Revised by Decree of the Second Vatican Ecumenical Council and Published by Authority of Paul VI. The English translation prepared by the International Commission on English in the Liturgy, Pueblo Publishing Co., New York, 1976. There are 2 volumes, and the volume used in this study is No. 1.

---

Is a Revised Baptism Valid?

Before looking at anything in the rites, we must give the word "revised" a serious look. You can revise a man by giving him a good hair cut, or you can revise him by neutering him. The effect in both cases is quite different. Has the revision of the rites of the Church made by order of Vatican II (1962-1965) and executed by Paul VI been the type that made them better or did the revisions neuter the rites - leaving them emasculated and useless? Henry VIII and his henchmen neutered Anglican Orders, thus making them invalid; so decreed Pope Leo XIII. 

What is Necessary for a Valid Sacrament?

In the rite for the baptism of children, we find the proper title, "Baptism for Children." However, when we look at the rite itself we find that the intention is defective. Three things are necessary for a valid sacrament: 

• proper matter, 
• proper form,
• proper intention.

We must look to the intention both in the rite itself and in the minister of the sacrament. If the intention as expressed in the rite is defective, then one need not check the intention of the minister since he cannot overcome a defective intention in the rite itself. 

Vatican II's Baptism has a Defective Intention

In the new Vatican II rite of baptism for children, it is not difficult to find how the rite has its intention vitiated. After the profession of faith is over, we read the following (page 234), and it is directed to the parents and godparents. We read, "Is it your will that N. should be baptized in the faith of the Church, which we have all professed with you?" Then the parents and godparents respond, "It is." After that the minister of the sacrament goes ahead with the proper matter (water - presumably poured over the skin of the head) and the proper form ("I baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." We have no question on this score. The matter and form are correct in the rite itself. 

How the Intention is Defective

At first you may not be aware of the satanic trick in regard to the intention of the rite. The word baptized has lost its true theological meaning. Let me give you an example. When a jeweler asks you, "Do you want to buy a diamond?" you know exactly what the product is. He must sell you a real diamond or be a real cheat. However, we have a new ball game if he asks, "Do you want to buy a diamond made of plastic?" You no longer have a diamond but a chunk of plastic. Why use the word diamond at all? The word plastic so modifies the concept of diamond that the true product no longer exists. The same is true in the Novus Ordro rite question, "Is it your will that N. should be baptized in the faith of the Church…" You could change the words, baptized in the faith of the Church to (1) introduced in the faith of the Church, or (2) brought in the faith of the Church, or (3) inducted in the faith of the Church, and the like expressions. If the question had stopped at, "Is it your will that N. should be baptized (period)", we would have no evidence that the intention of the rite is vitiated. However, we have the evidence that the word baptized is modified to ruin it just as the phrase, "Do you want to buy a diamond made of plastic?" 

Let me be a little more specific on this question. If you go to a hardware store and order a box of socket wrenches you get the whole box, that is, the entire full box of sockets, ratchets, handles and the like. If you lose or break one socket in your set, you go to the same hardware store and order size so and so and not the whole box, and that is all you get. Well, baptism as it stands in Catholic theology contains four sockets, namely, 

• forgiveness of original sin,
• if necessary, forgiveness of personal sins (and then comes sanctifying grace), 
• the placing of an indelible character on the soul, and
• the person baptized is made a member of the true Mystical Body of Christ.

When the Novus Ordo rite asks, "Is it your will that N. should be baptized in the faith of the Church …", it merely asks for the fourth and last socket in the box of baptism, namely, membership in the community as it is. 

You Get All or Nothing

In regard to the sacrament of baptism, you receive all the four elements (as stated above) or you receive none of them at all. It is true that forgiveness of original sin and mortal sin can be suspended by reason of non-divine and Catholic faith in an adult or non-sorrow for personal mortal sins. However, when that lack is provided for, forgiveness follows immediately by reason of the valid sacrament of baptism. Once again, you get all or nothing, and asking for a part only, means getting nothing at all. 

Can a non-Catholic be a Sponsor?

We have a further difficulty in regard to the faith of the community in that both sponsors in a new rite Vatican II baptism need not be Catholics. One can be a non-Catholic (of a different faith) who stands as a witness of their common faith. Obviously that is not the faith of the true Mystical Body of Christ, the Catholic Church. If there is a common faith between so-called Catholics and non-Catholics then that must be the "faith" of the one world religion. It is terrible to be lead to believe that one could be baptized into such a faith and religion which is in no way Catholic. 

To Be Safe: Re-Baptize Conditionally

If I did not have to deal with persons baptized in the Novus Ordo, I would not even go through the exercise of judging the validity or non-validity of the new rite of baptism. There is a strong indication that the intention of the rite is vitiated, so to be safe in this regard I must take the course of re-baptizing the person(s) conditionally. If and when a true Pope surfaces (in God's providence), I shall submit the whole affair to his judgment as was done with Pope Leo XIII in regard to the validity or non-validity of Anglican Orders. They were declared invalid. It is likely that the same verdict will then be made in regard to the Novus Ordo baptisms. 

Will the Son of Man find Faith on Earth?

When one takes the broader view of the problem, it is too terrible to think about. Since all of the off-spring of the Novus Ordo Catholics quite likely remain heathens after baptism, then can never receive any other sacraments (validly) after that. It follows, very likely, that the Novus Ordo priests with that baptism are heathens playing store as if they were real priests. That goes for all the members, way to the top, Bishops, Cardinals and even the Pope himself are all heathens. A Rock Mass around a totem pole is the best they have to offer. Could this be the way Our Lord's words in Luke 18,8 are verified, namely, "Yet when the Son of Man comes, will He find, do you think, faith on earth?"  

Comment by Jerome: Since baptism is so important and necessary for salvation, it is recommended that all persons baptized in the Vatican II sect (or other non-Catholic sects such as protestants) receive a conditional baptism.

• Link for Conditional Baptism For Those who Have Received Baptism

https://prophecyfilm.blogspot.com/2015/03/important-catholic-dogma-you-must.html#for-those-who-have-received-baptism

FOR THOSE WHO HAVE RECEIVED BAPTISM, IT IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT:

1) Know and believe the basic catechism (i.e. the basic teachings) of the traditional Catholic Faith. PLEASE READ THE CATECHISM NOW One should also immediately begin to pray the Rosary each day (15 decades preferably). If you don’t know how, consult the How to Pray the Rosary section of our website. Always take time every day to read and study the Faith, and ask God for final perseverance.

2) Hold belief in all the traditional dogmas of the Church and the correct Catholic positions against the post-Vatican II sect (covered in detail in our material), including, for example, the dogma Outside the Church There is No Salvation (without exception), the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Papacy, Papal Infallibility, the necessity of water baptism, etc..

3) Make the profession of faith for converts from the Council of Trent, which is below. If there is a specific sect to which you belonged, or if you believed in a specific heresy, add at the end that you also reject that heretical sect or heresy. The Council of Trent’s Profession of Faith for Converts

4) If a validly ordained Catholic priest is available to you, you must make a general confession to a priest ordained in the traditional rite of ordination after taking the previous 3 steps. This is a confession in which one mentions all mortal (and venial) sins committed after baptism that one can remember, including adherence to any sects or false religions or having spread a false sect or false religion. Beware to check carefully beforehand that the priest you approach for the sacraments is not heretical nor in communion with other heretics. Today, in the Great Apostasy, there is almost not a single acceptable or non-heretical priest left in the world. The only alternative that is left for almost everyone today is to confess their sins to God directly and ask Him with tears or sorrow and true repentance to forgive them their sins. This will forgive your sins if you are sincere, if no other option is available. If you find a non-heretical priest, then as long as the priest says “I absolve you from your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost” the confession is valid. A good practice is to write down your sins on a piece of paper so that you will have an easier time remembering the sins you have committed. This can also be done by those who have no priest and who confess directly to God, in order to facilitate that your confession to Our Lord will be as exact as possible. One could also make a confession of sins or heresies to any person or friend you feel you trust. This should generally be someone who is able to advice you on spiritual things, and not to any person you know.

Related article: https://against-all-heresies-and-errors.blogspot.com/2017/09/valid-confession-question-with-follow-up-on-avoiding-occasion-of-sin-and-penance.html

Confessing our sins to each other, even though we cannot give absolution, is also a great tool to use in exposing the devil and in overcoming habitual bad habits or sins (reoccurring or habitual bad habits is in most cases what leads people to sin in the first place). The Saints had as a habit to confess their sins daily, and thus we should try to act in this way as much as we are able. For confessing our sins daily, breeds humility.