Hell

  • Thread starter Thread starter FelixBlue
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

FelixBlue

Guest
I reject the doctrine of hell for the following reasons:
  1. The punishment outweighs the crime.
Man’s concept of justice is and has always been that a punishment should be proportional to the crime. Even in our most draconian view of justice, an eye was demanded of an eye, etc.

But with hell, the punishment far exceeds the nature of the crime. Hell is an eternal/infinite punishment for a temporal/finite crime.

And yet some (Anselm and others) will argue that the crime is actually infinite in dimension because it is against God.

This brings me to my second reason.
  1. Full culpability requires full knowledge. But here, even though the crime is technically against the Infinite/Eternal God, man does not have full knowledge of God. At best, man’s knowledge is abstract. Following the idea of Cardinal Newman, our knowledge of the infinitude of God is notional…abstract. At anyrate, I could quote any number of Church Fathers on the fact that our knowledge of God is incomplete (Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, Thomas, etc.).
Thus a simple sylogism:

Full culpability requires full knowledge.
Man does not have full knowledge.
Therefore, man is not fully culpable.

Ergo, no hell.
  1. Culpability also requires a full participation of the will (which is already impossible given our incomplet knowledge). We happened to be born, however, with a proclivity to sin. We are weak. Concupiscence and the whole story. Can we be blamed? Yes…but only to a degree. And degrees are finite. Hell is not. Thus no hell.
  2. Although there are many other arguments (most having to do with the nature of God), the strongest argument in my view is the following:
We (from bishops to priests to the average Joe Layman) simply do not behave as though people are going to hell.

Imagine you are standing next to a burning house with people inside and you know you have the capacity or at least the possibilty of getting into the house and pulling them out to safety. Do you stand outside and do nothing? Do you strike up a conversation about politics or make a sandwich or engage in necessary recreation?

But that is what we do regarding others and hell.

The Church teaches that there is hell and that some are going to eternally be separated from God. But we (in general) behave as though notihing is going on.

So, those are my main arguments. I’d like light and prayers from anyone. My desire is to be faithful to the Church and the Magisterium, but I find it increasingly difficult to do so. I can only do mental gymnastics for so long. If the doctrine of hell is wrong, then so must be the doctrine of the teaching authority of the Church.

Thanks from a convert (of 12 years) who wishes to remain “solid”.
 
I accept the doctrine of Hell because the Catholic Church has formally defined it. Try this link for more info newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm. Thanks for this heady opinion, but I’ll trust the Church that Christ entrusted with the deposit of Faith over one person’s partially formed opinion.
 
Thanks for the reply, but that is precisely the kind of reply I find it hard to stomach.

I too wish to accept the authority of the Church. I am a convert from evangelical protestantism, as I said, and came into the Church 12 years ago because I believed in the historicity of the Church (I was formerly an evangelical) and was convinced by Cardinal Newman’s arguments about the need for the authority of the Church in his Apologia. So rest assured of my tremendous desire to fully accept the Church’s teaching.

Still, you offer no help in simply pointing to that authority. Here, I am looking to reason (a faculty, the Church accepts as fairly useful by the way, thought not perfect) for an answer. I am looking at experience as well.

Surely you have reasons for accepting the authority of the Church. Surely your reason must not be “I accept the authority of the Church based upon its authority”. That would be circular. Rather, you accept the Magisterium because what it teaches appears to line up with reality…it appears to be truthful, etc.

So my point? The doctrine of hell seems to undermine that “lining up with reality”. It undermines the authority of the Church.

Now, can I have a response to my arguments? Or will you be honest and reply that you have none? “Authority” cannot serve here as a response as my doubts about hell undermine my acceptance of the authority you point to.
 
It’s an impressive argument.

Here are some things to think about:

Man can make complete choices: Yes I like ice cream: no, I do not like broccoli. He can make these choices with complete 100% conviction. It does not require infinite knowlege of broccoli or ice cream to make these choices. Without infinite knowlege it is possible to make such a choice categorically, but a human being can make a definitive choice. Free will exists. If a man chooses to reject God, he can do so completely and God will honor his free will. This hypothetical man just landed in hell. The absence of God is Hell.

Your argument about the unjust nature of the punishment assumes that you are the judge. Take comfort that Jesus Christ, not you, is the judge and his means and methods of judgement are infinitely perfect. He will know precisely if somone fully rejects Him or if someone accepts Him.

By accepting Him you repent your sins (it follows that when accepting good we reject our bad) and are forgiven. But I can see someone being too prideful to accept his forgiveness, someone who thinks he knows better than God, such a person might reject God and then not receive forgiveness. Not receiving forgiveness the hypothetical man is left with sin against an infinitely Holy God, creating an infinite distance between this hypothetical man and God.

Also, I too run into all sorts of things in religion and the bible that I don’t understand at first and it can be troubling. I think praying for patience and humility and I believe understanding will come, if you petition the Holy Spirit.

hope this helps

peace
 
40.png
FelixBlue:
Thus a simple sylogism:

Full culpability requires full knowledge.
Man does not have full knowledge.
Therefore, man is not fully culpable.
Click to expand...
I do not believe in a hell either, but your syllogism is wrong, because the praemissa maior is not necessarily true. One may be subject to a law without knowing about that law, and thus culpability does not require knowlege.
 
Sure, here is a repsonse. You are either faithful to the Magisterium or you are not. If you wonder what happens when you eschew the Magisterium in favor of your own private reasoning, just take a look at Protestantism and its continually evolving denominationalism. You either believe that God, via Christ, entrusted his deposit of faith to the Catholic Church and via the Holy Spirit, preserves it from teaching error in regard to faith and morals, or you trust yourself. Since private interpretation has proven itself to be a grand failure, history and evidence favors the Magisterium. I will pray that God grants you discernment in this case, and I hope you do as well.
 
Pax vobiscum.

Well, think of it this way: why are we able to go to Heaven based upon what we do in this life? The answer is, we go to Heaven based upon the grace of God granted through Christ. It is grace that is eternal. When one sins, one rejects grace, and when one dies impenitent, he is damned eternally. If you reject an eternal hell because our sins are temporal, you must necessarily reject an eternal heaven, because our merits are temporal! But, since our faith and works are based upon an eternal grace, sin is based upon a rejection of that gift. We choose to separate ourselves from God.

This is sufficient as an answer to the first objection.

Reply to Objection Two: Although Man does not have total knowledge of God, he does have knowedge of His Law through the concience, and through the free grace of God.

Reply to Objection Three: Although a concupiscence can lessen the culpability of a sin when the sinner is attempting to reconcile himself to God, it increases culpability when there is impenitence, much like an incorrigible alcoholic.

If anything contradicts church teaching, I recant it.

The Augustinian
 
Has anyone actually read the Bible? I’m certain you’ll find the judgment there. Perhaps the book of Matthew or Revelations could get you started. Happy reading and stop trying to solve this logically. Live for Jesus as if your eternal soul depended on it!
 
40.png
MichaelTDoyle:
It’s an impressive argument.

Man can make complete choices: Yes I like ice cream: no, I do not like broccoli. He can make these choices with complete 100% conviction. It does not require infinite knowlege of broccoli or ice cream to make these choices. Without infinite knowlege it is possible to make such a choice categorically, but a human being can make a definitive choice. Free will exists. If a man chooses to reject God, he can do so completely and God will honor his free will. This hypothetical man just landed in hell. The absence of God is Hell.
Click to expand...
I believe in free will and that man can make definitive choices. But your analogy breaks down in that the choice for broccoli is a finite choice. Any consequence regarding the choice of broccoli is necessarily finite. Thus, if my child refuses to eat his broccoli, and I warn him that he won’t get dessert unless he does, it is perfectly just for me to deny him dessert. Why? He knows what he must do; he knows what the consequence will be; and he makes his choice. The consquence of “landing in hell” is different. Why? Again, the knowledge issue. While we can know God notionally, in the abstract, and even have concrete experience of him, this knowledge never reaches full knowledge. We remain on the level of the insane who can plead insanity.

I agree with you about the judge.

Thanks.
 
To be fair, your entire assertion is invalid. If you are a Catholic, then you accept one authority. That authority is Christ and His P.M. the Pope. Mental gymnastics are not enough. We need faith and reason.

Anyone who does not belive in hell, does not believe the Gospel and thus, does not believe in Christ. Hell is just. The only reason I can think of that so many would reject Christ’s teaching on hell is for two reason. The first reason is that we are shaped more by pop culture than by eternal truth and the second reason is if we are immersed in a sinful lifestyle, that tends to close one off totally to the truth.
 
40.png
AnAtheist:
I do not believe in a hell either, but your syllogism is wrong, because the praemissa maior is not necessarily true. One may be subject to a law without knowing about that law, and thus culpability does not require knowlege.
Click to expand...
Yes, but traditionally that law must at least be promulgated in some public fashion therefore giving each individual at least the real opportunity of knowing about the law.

Here, sufficient knowledge about God is not known. Yes one may know that he exists; but one may not know much of his nature, and certainly not enought to know when God is offended, etc.

I would argue, then, that my first premise is accurate in that the knowledge of the nature of God is not sufficiently promulgated.
 
The Augustinian:
Pax vobiscum.

Well, think of it this way: why are we able to go to Heaven based upon what we do in this life? The answer is, we go to Heaven based upon the grace of God granted through Christ. It is grace that is eternal. When one sins, one rejects grace, and when one dies impenitent, he is damned eternally. If you reject an eternal hell because our sins are temporal, you must necessarily reject an eternal heaven, because our merits are temporal! But, since our faith and works are based upon an eternal grace, sin is based upon a rejection of that gift. We choose to separate ourselves from God.

This is sufficient as an answer to the first objection.

Reply to Objection Two: Although Man does not have total knowledge of God, he does have knowedge of His Law through the concience, and through the free grace of God.

The Augustinian
Click to expand...
You have hit the nail on its head! Hell would be a rejection of grace and heaven is an acceptance of grace. Question: how does one carry out an act of accepting grace? Is it not grace? Thus, in the end, one’s going to heaven is entirely based upon grace…nothing else. I choose grace because of grace. And so forth. It is not of myself (to risk sounding protestant, go to Ephesians “fom man is saved by faith through grace, and that not of himself…” I paraphrase). So then, if it is God’s good mercy that causes me to choose grace, then how to explain one who chooses to reject grace. Logically, it seems you end with Calvin’s position where God chooses who goes to hell and who goes to heaven.

In the end, I can only believe in all being saved by the wonderful, creative grace of God (following Origen, Gregory of Nyssa and Nazianzen and others).

As to the reply to the second objection, see my response to the atheist.

What about our practical behavior? We behave as though no one is going to hell. Any thoughts?

THanks.
 
Yes one may know that he exists; but one may not know much of his nature, and certainly not enought to know when God is offended, etc.
Click to expand...
Catholics are required to form their consciences with the truth. That means they are required to learn what Christ expects of them and how to discern His will. Invincible ignorance is one thing, but intentional ignorance is quite another. The second abounds today.
 
40.png
liv3ordie:
Has anyone actually read the Bible? I’m certain you’ll find the judgment there. Perhaps the book of Matthew or Revelations could get you started. Happy reading and stop trying to solve this logically. Live for Jesus as if your eternal soul depended on it!
Click to expand...
I have read the bible and the fathers and…the argument from authority cannot work here for me.

And what of our behavior? Why do we behave as though no one will really go to hell?

Thanks.
 
40.png
FelixBlue:
I reject the doctrine of hell for the following reasons:
  1. The punishment outweighs the crime.
Man’s concept of justice is and has always been that a punishment should be proportional to the crime. Even in our most draconian view of justice, an eye was demanded of an eye, etc.

But with hell, the punishment far exceeds the nature of the crime. Hell is an eternal/infinite punishment for a temporal/finite crime.

And yet some (Anselm and others) will argue that the crime is actually infinite in dimension because it is against God.

This brings me to my second reason.
  1. Full culpability requires full knowledge. But here, even though the crime is technically against the Infinite/Eternal God, man does not have full knowledge of God. At best, man’s knowledge is abstract. Following the idea of Cardinal Newman, our knowledge of the infinitude of God is notional…abstract. At anyrate, I could quote any number of Church Fathers on the fact that our knowledge of God is incomplete (Gregory of Nyssa, Augustine, Thomas, etc.).
Thus a simple sylogism:

Full culpability requires full knowledge.
Man does not have full knowledge.
Therefore, man is not fully culpable.

Ergo, no hell.

The Church teaches that there is hell and that some are going to eternally be separated from God. But we (in general) behave as though notihing is going on.

So, those are my main arguments. I’d like light and prayers from anyone. My desire is to be faithful to the Church and the Magisterium, but I find it increasingly difficult to do so. I can only do mental gymnastics for so long. If the doctrine of hell is wrong, then so must be the doctrine of the teaching authority of the Church.

Thanks from a convert (of 12 years) who wishes to remain “solid”.
Click to expand...
Your approach is all about punishment and the lack of logic surrounding the degree of this punishment. I agree, and struggle with the same issues. But I try to not let my struggles trump the Word of God.

“Mental gymnastics”, good term, sometimes I feel if there were an olympic event that held such a gymnastic I’d be in the running for the gold.

You may view this as an intellectual cop-out but I’ll state it anyhow:

I trust there is a Hell, because Jesus said so.

I trust people are there, because (I believe) Jesus strongly insinuated it.

I trust Jesus is perfectly just, because He is God and is perfect.

I trust no loving “good” person will end up Hell, because (I do not believe) I would not be unfaithful to the Church and the Magisterium if I held this belief. And I do not believe Jesus ever said there was.

I trust my capacity to understand all of the mysteries of our faith to be woefully inadaquet, because no matter how hard I bang my head against the wall to get satisfactory answers new questions seem to emerge.

I trust in the Lord, because I must. I’ve lived without Him and it was “Hell”.

Sorry if you see this as a cop-out, but I am getting to old and too tired for mental gymnastics. Now, I simply admit my lack of capacity to ever fully understand it all and try to just love and trust Jesus.

I try to have faith that when the last day comes these mysteries will be revealed to me and I will understand and see the love and justice in it all.
 
  1. Man’s concept of justice has nothing to do with God’s justice. Do you believe in justice at all? If we are to be judged after we die, what will we be judged for and what are the possible consequences for sin?
2.We actually do have full knowledge, if not understanding. We know that serious sin can lead to everlasting seperation from God. Adam and Eve knew (with full knowledge) that eating from the treee of good and evil was wrong; they did it anyway!

alternate sylogism:
We know a particular act is wrong.
We do it anyway.
We are culpable for the action.

Full knowledge doesnt require full understanding, we know its wrong because the Church/Bible/Jesus tell us so. The fact that we do not fully understand the complete ramifications of our actions doesnt let us off the hook. That argument could be used to excuse anyone for anything.

3.yes we can be blamed for our actions. We were all born with not only free will but with an intellect and reason sufficient to make decisions between good and bad. We are different from all other creatures, we are the only ones made in the image and likeness of God. When we sin, we choose ourselves over God, it is an act of pride and disobedience. Unless you were forced against your will to perform a particular sinful act then you are culpable for the action.
  1. You think this to be your best argument against hell, “We (from bishops to priests to the average Joe Layman) simply do not behave as though people are going to hell.” To me that was the worst of your arguments. You are basically saying that since people have become so indifferent towards salvation and have no real fear of hell, then hell must not really exist. Now if a time comes when people behave differently and show true signs that they fear going to hell, would this change in behavior suddenly make hell a reality? Is hell only true for those that believe in it?
As for your burning building analogy; suppose these people are inside, but they do not yet realize that it is on fire. Wouldnt you want to let them know that they are in danger? You are suggesting that we tell them that the fire isnt real and that they are in no real danger. That is even worse than the person that walks by and doesnt do or say anything at all. But the truth is that those that believe in hell are not standing by watching others go down in flames as you suggest. All of those that stand up for the Truth in public are actually standing there yelling “the building is on fire, get out before you die!” The problem is that the people inside the burning building cannot see the flames through the pride of their egos. How many times have you heard lately someone proclaim in public, “we cannot endorse homosexuality, it is a sin and those that comit that sin could lose their salvation!”, only to be labeled a “hate monger” or “intolerant homophobe”. How many times have you heard one of the faithful argue that abortion is murder and that souls are in danger because we allow this great evil to exist be mocked and called names or even spit on? I see this stuff almost every day.

The next time you hear someone standing up for the truth in the face of evil, remember that they are actually trying to save people from hell by yelling, “homosexuality is wrong! Abortion is murder!” To say that the building is not on fire is a lie of the devil, the father of lies and a murderer from the begining. I sincerly hope that you will reconsider your position on hell. For if there is no hell then what about heaven? If hell is in question the so also must heaven be in question. If heaven exist but hell does not then everybody goes to heave regardless of evil behavior on earth; what is the incentive for being good if there is no reward? Or would you have us believe that neither heave or hell exists, like John Lennon wants us to image. I personally do not want to imagine such a horrible thing as that.
 
40.png
fix:
To be fair, your entire assertion is invalid. If you are a Catholic, then you accept one authority. That authority is Christ and His P.M. the Pope. Mental gymnastics are not enough. We need faith and reason.

Anyone who does not belive in hell, does not believe the Gospel and thus, does not believe in Christ. Hell is just. The only reason I can think of that so many would reject Christ’s teaching on hell is for two reason. The first reason is that we are shaped more by pop culture than by eternal truth and the secon reason is if we are immersed in a sinful lifestyle, that tends to close one off totally from the truth.
Click to expand...
You say we need faith and reason (by the way, I liked the encyclical) and yet you are not willing or are not able to make reasonable arguments. Your only argument is from authority. And believe me, I fully understand why you accept that authority. As I said, I am a convert from evangelical protestantism and thoroughly have an understanding for the need for the authority of the magisterium. I need no arguments there (although at this point, because of hell, a question I’ve had for years and years) I’m am on the verge of rejecting the authority of the Church as well. Not because I have anywhere better to go, but because I find myself in the position of either having to reject reason or the Church. The problem is, if I reject reason, I also reject the Church (as the Church has rejected fedeism).

Answer this: why do most of us go around behaving as if no one will go to hell…or at least not really caring.
 
40.png
FelixBlue:
I reject the doctrine of hell for the following reasons…

Answer this: why do most of us go around behaving as if no one will go to hell…or at least not really caring.
Click to expand...
What question do you want answered on this thread? Valid proof of the existance of hell, or why people behave like it doesn’t exist? One is a doctrinal question, the other is a psychological one. It would take days to explain the collapse of the objective moral system, much longer than can adequately be explained on this type of forum. People have written books on the subject. The short of the matter, people favor themselves over God. When you favor God’ s will over your own, you needn’t worry about Hell.
 
40.png
FelixBlue:
I have read the bible and the fathers and…the argument from authority cannot work here for me.

And what of our behavior? Why do we behave as though no one will really go to hell?
Click to expand...
Yes it is hard to believe that people act as though there is no hell but most do not recognize that the house is on fire. More accurately the house you describe is being consumed by termites. It slowly rots away piece by piece. You could have a party every day and not realize the termites are doing the same thing as a fire but on a different timeline. The goal of satan is to have us eternally seperated from God as he is. If you yell ‘Help my house is on fire’ … you will get help. If you yell ‘Help my house has termites’ you will be laughed at. Sin is like the termite it eats bit by bit till we are unrecognizable.

Actually your analogy to a house does work. We are temples of God. It is how we tend to our house … do you do regular maintanence on your house … ie (prayful life). Sometimes we must call in experts to help us (ie church) to make repairs.

To say there is no hell is saying there is no consequence to living a sinful life. I know you dont have to believe in hell, you do a free will to do as you wish but it seems to me your knowledge of the Catholic faith precludes you from using many of the arguments listed in your first post.
 
FelixBlue wrote: So then, if it is God’s good mercy that causes me to choose grace, then how to explain one who chooses to reject grace. Logically, it seems you end with Calvin’s position where God chooses who goes to hell and who goes to heaven.
Click to expand...
The Catholic understanding of grace can be compared to the workings of a car. Grace is like gasoline: gasoline enables us to drive a car, but we must start the engine in order to drive it. God’s grace enables us to choose Him, but we are also able to reject Him. So, God’s grace comes first, then our response to His grace. This is opposed to Pelagian and Semi-Pelagian soteriology, as well as Calvinism.

As for my own believes on predestination, I’m a Thomist, so my position is closer to that of Calvin’s, although I believe that there is free will.

As for knowledge of God, if we had full knowledge of God, we would be experiencing the Beatific Vision, and thus we would be in Heaven! So, paradoxically if we had full knowledge of God we cannot reject Him, since He is the Supreme Good, and Man always chooses what he perceives to be good.

As for practical behavior, there are many reasons that we Christians don’t act like paramedics in evangelizing. First of all, we need to use prudence; to be too zealous may just repel sinners. Conversion involves persuasion, not coercion, and to persuade someone to believe in anything involves many difficulties. Another, more unfortunate reason is that a lack of catechesis has dulled our sense of sin and eternity. Nevertheless, whatever the practice of believers is, it does not affect the objective reality of God. Certainly unrepentant sinners don’t act like there’s a Hell!

God bless,

The Augustinian
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top