Grading the Major Religions


Grading the Religions

Assumptions of the metaphor:

If grade is:

2.0, supernatural goodness is possible, that is, given the condition of the person’s beliefs and disposition, it is possible for the person to acquire sanctifying grace. Therefore, <= 2.0 means, cannot be saved in such a condition. (Therefore 2.0 represent peak of natural goodness.)

= 3.0, is a Christian Religion

The grades (explanation follows):

A+: Everybody in Heaven

4.0: Catholicism

3.75: Orthodoxy

3.0: Protestantism

2.66: Muslims, and all other innocent monotheist infidels who seek Divine Revelation and Assistance.

2.33: Innocent Pagans who seek Divine Revelation and Assistance

2.0: Monotheist Infidels who either do not accept or do not seek Divine Revelation AND/OR who do not accept or seek Divine Assistance

1.0: Pagans who either do not accept or do not seek Divine Revelation AND/OR who do not accept or seek Divine Assistance

0.0: Total Apostates: mostly atheistic materialists and relativistic materialists

explanation will follow later.


And again the Catholic Church is portrayed as being better than others :rollseyes:


So you are grading and ranking people based on your perception of their group’s acceptance of God and practices? Isn’t that a little judgmental? What good comes from this?


First of all, I think you are guilty of heresy from the Catholic point of view by saying that all Catholics will necessarily be saved. I believe this was refuted by St. Augustine. It has always been believed by Catholics that there will most likely be quite a few Catholics in hell.

In the second place, did you mean to say that Protestantism just barely misses being a Christian religion? If you did not mean to say that, then you should have put a line under the “greater than” sign to say that a religion with a grade greater than or equal to 3.0 is a Christian religion.



Welp, I guess I’m going to hell.

Although given you’re doing a few things your religion expressly and vehemently forbids, I suppose I’ll have the pleasure of your company there! :slight_smile:


Who said “The path to hell is paved with the skulls of bishops”?


It’s attributed to various Fathers of the Church, but most commonly John Chrysostom. An alternate version runs along the lines of ‘the roads of hell are paved with the skulls of priests, and the signposts are the skulls of bishops’.


Wait a minute, I’m not attempting judge anyone. I’m talking about objectively the degrees of truth and grace that are available in the applicable categories.

Please read this:

Protestants can be Holier

I’m saying salvation is POSSIBLE in above 2.0, not that everybody will be. There are persons in lower levels that seek out more dilligently than some persons in higher levels. and therefore, those who are more dilligent, even if in lower levels, increase their chances of being saved.


2.66…you’ve really worked this out havent you


This reminds me of the priest in my parish who is now running the RCIA. I heard he told everyone there he was standing in a room with people holier than he was.
That was one of the few things he ever said I could agree with. If he did really say it.:slight_smile:


So, uh, you’re not trying to judge anyone, but you’re judging them anyway? Look, I rate a 1.0 on your scale at best, and that means you have condemned me to hell.

There is a God, and his name is Scott Pauline. I see the liiiiight!


Lol! IMaybe we can have a CAF reunion party…



I misread your post–I see now that you were clearly saying that those in heaven have an “A+.” I thought you were saying that an A±-which typically means a perfect grade–meant that everyone receiving that grade went to heaven. And when you then proceeded to say that Catholicism got 4.0, I thought. . . . well, never mind. I wasn’t reading well. My mistake and I apologize.



I think I need to clarify some things.

I suppose that there could be persons who are objectively <= 2.0 but are not fully culpable because of innocent intellectual and/or psychological impediments.

For example, Joe had to listen to his little sister scream horribly as she slowly died in his parent’s house’s fire, and consquently, he cannot believe that a good God would allow this, and so he becomes atheist.

Or another person is a deist because they have not learned the true understanding of the meaning of suffering (i.e, from the Catholic Church), so that, in light of physical evil, which seems indifferent to the moral condition of the recipients of its wrath, they conclude that since God must be good, and good people suffer physical evil that seems senseless, they conclude that God does not interfere with the Creation, seeing as this would be the only logical conclusion that can be inferred.

So, again, I suppose there could be persons in conditions of <= 2.0 that are not fully culpable because they have innocent obstacles in intellect or will.

But, in general, it is understood in Catholicism that only persons who cross the threshold of death with sanctifying grace can go on to be with God eternally. Sanctifying grace implies the presence, at least implicitly, of three Theological virtues of Faith, Hope, and Charity.

Faith would seem to require some positive belief in a power beyond the mere physical realm. It would also seem to imply that the person accepts, in humility, that he cannot find all the answers to the meaning of life on his own, but that the divine power must impart something. He doesn’t need to be correct in where or how he thinks this takes place, he just needs to do the best he can to try to seek this revelation. This would seem to be absolutely required, since the idea that humanity can find the answers to its questions utterly independent of the divine is IMPLICITLY opposed to one of the foundational principles of Gospel: Jesus did not come to the world and say, “Hey, guys, you already know everything you need to know. I don’t need to tell you anything. You can figure it out by yourself.”

For what does salvation mean? It means we cannot save ourselves. That we need help, to be rescued. And how are we rescued? In intellect and will, for those the faculties of soul that need healing. How is our intellect saved or rescued? By receiving the light of God’s Revelation.

This leads to the second problem, which is the other faculty, the will. For even after it is revealed to us WHAT we need to know and WHAT we need to do in our intellect, our WILLS need the POWER to carry out these things, to live in this light. And that requires GRACE, assistance, life, from God, or at least from the Divine.

Therefore, it would seem that neither a deist nor a rationalist can be with God if they refuse, respectively, to admit they need divine assistance to be moral and that they need revelation from the divine to know what it is they should do, who the divine is, and how they relate to Him.

In conclusion, I am not here to condemn individuals who may be “<= 2.0”, for the obstacles that keep them from being brought above “2.0” may be innocent, a pain, a wound. But it would seem that this wound would have to be healed in some sense, at least partially, before death.

Also, the people in heaven are A+ because they are morally perfect and incapable of sinning and because, seeing as they see God face to face, they know and understand all doctrine, even those that have not yet been resolved by the Church formally.

From there, I give don’t give Catholicism on earth an A+ because, as it were, doctrinal development is not yet complete and because we all have concupiscence and because most of us, including especially me, a poor sinner, have not reached the unitive phase of the saint.

I also thought it might help for me to post the following link on my site that discusses the notion of the salvation of non-Christians.

I hope this helps clarify.


Please see below. I think it’s possible that individuals who are currently below 2.0 that that they could be healed. Again, I realize terrible things happen to people or their loved ones and they become wounded. I am sorry if something tragic has happened to you or your loved ones.

I pray for my salvation daily. I am poor sinner. Only by his grace am I able to believe in anything.


I realize the numbers are rather arbitrary. It is the more the theological analysis based on the metaphor.


no problem,

I hope what I wrote above but after this post helps as well.

Sorry for any confusion, Contarini.



Hey, man, I agree. There are so many evangelical Protestants who put to shame typical Catholics in this country. They have alot less truth and grace than is available to Catholics, but they use wonderfully and dilligently what they do have, and the typical Catholic mocks his treasure, doesn’t even bother to bury it.


No argument here: scandal is a partial excuse for not believing. I don’t fully blame the Protestants for rebelling, as I surmise there were many bishops that didn’t make it because they were given the most but were like lazy slobs.

I give the modern world a break, I do. And I think God does too. I don’t think God is ready to end the world yet. I think if the world gets a spanking, they’ll come back. It’s like the typical teenager. As they get older into their teens, they realize that mom and dad are not perfect, and so they use it as an excuse to rebel. They are certain the mom and dad are really clueless and just tyrants imposing unfair restrictions on their freedom and wisdom. But usually around about 25 to 30, after having gone through some consequences of their revelry, they are able to see that mom and dad were mostly right, and they were just rebellious young people.


No, no, I’m not grading people, or their subjective level of dilligence and sincerity. No, no. Just the objective amount of grace and truth available in the respective categories.

No, no.

the daughter of a friend I know who goes to a Catholic high school says she can count on her fingers how many students don’t embrace the apostate, sexual revolution culture, and she says, THREE of them are MUSLIMS.

So then, I foresee that there shall be Muslims (that is, who were on earth Muslims) in high places in heaven, and many many more times Catholics in the lowest levels of hell because they mocked their treasure, and the Muslims had a tenth of it and yet made much with what they had.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit