Isn't eternity in hell a disproportionate punishment?

[Windfish]

Someone please explain to me how the whole concept of heaven and hell isn’t ridiculous.

Why would a supposedly omnipotent God subject a person that has committed x number of sins to the same place of condemnation and same amount of eternal pain/torture what have you, as a person that has committed 3x number of sins.

It’s quite obvious looking at the world that people can’t be separated into 2 groups of good vs. bad.

People will be given what they have chosen - God or Not-God. People who reject God will be given complete autonomy - Hell, which is eternal separation from God. People who choose God will be with Him.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

Someone please explain to me how the whole concept of heaven and hell isn’t ridiculous.

Why would a supposedly omnipotent God subject a person that has committed x number of sins to the same place of condemnation and same amount of eternal pain/torture what have you, as a person that has committed 3x number of sins.

It’s quite obvious looking at the world that people can’t be separated into 2 groups of good vs. bad.

It is not X number of sins or the ‘same place’.

Those in hell continue to commit the sins while they exist in hell, and never repent of what they did on earth.

Besides, somebody who committed 10 X ‘either’ of your examples’ sins could go to heaven IF that person repented. Amazing, isn’t it? So just imagine, there are people in heaven who repented of lots more sins than OTHER people in heaven. Hardly seems 'fair, right? Do you expect then that those who sincerely repent should then say to God, “Gee, God, I know you’ve forgiven me but on earth I committed more sins than some of the people in heaven so it’s not FAIR I get to go to heaven?”

 

[Historicity]

People will be given what they have chosen - God or Not-God. People who reject God will be given complete autonomy - Hell, which is eternal separation from God. People who choose God will be with Him.

Sadly, we don’t live in a black and white world, and due to the extreme amount of misinformation present in today’s society, some people are truly conflicted with the ideas that you hold and are not able to make an accurate decision of their belief in a deity. I’d be curious to find out what your thought process is in regards as to what God’s consensus would be on the life of someone such as an agnostic, or a person without the means or ability to find and accept the same “God” as you.

 

[Debora123]

But ETERNITY for even one mortal sin? Sorry, I have a hard time accepting that. It just seems too unreasonable.

I agree…

 

[Windfish]

Sadly, we don’t live in a black and white world, and due to the extreme amount of misinformation present in today’s society, some people are truly conflicted with the ideas that you hold and are not able to make an accurate decision of their belief in a deity. I’d be curious to find out what your thought process is in regards as to what God’s consensus would be on the life of someone such as an agnostic, or a person without the means or ability to find and accept the same “God” as you.

Right. Out of curiosity, are you familiar at all with Catholic teaching? I have been making the assumption that you are, in fact, familiar with Catholic teaching. Catholic teaching authoritatively addresses all of this.

God is just, and He will only judge individuals for what they know, not for what they do not. As the Gospels say, He is very merciful to the poor - not just those who are economically poor, but those who are poor in spirit and knowledge of Him. If such people cooperate with what grace they have, they have the hope of salvation by God’s mercy and justice. But for those who should know better and are ignorant through their own fault, those who become deaf and blind willfully, they will be judged accordingly. I am summarizing Catholic teaching, of course.

 

[steve_b]

Someone please explain to me how the whole concept of heaven and hell isn’t ridiculous.

They are only ridiculous if they don’t exist. We know they DO exist. So they aren’t ridiculous.
H:

Why would a supposedly omnipotent God subject a person that has committed x number of sins to the same place of condemnation and same amount of eternal pain/torture what have you, as a person that has committed 3x number of sins.

There are levels of heaven as there are levels of hell.
H:

It’s quite obvious looking at the world that people can’t be separated into 2 groups of good vs. bad.

NO ONE bad will enter heaven, or heaven wouldn’t be heaven.

 

[Windfish]

I agree…

Well, remember what mortal sin entails. Essentially, it is someone who acts with full knowledge and will against God, right? Think about what that means. Pray about it. The Holy Spirit might illuminate you.

For many of us, though, is this really the case? We may know that a particular sin is mortal, but we commit it, anyway, perhaps because of an addiction, a bad habit, or simply not thinking or being responsible enough. All of this changes the moral equation and may not fulfill the conditions to being mortal. Personally, I don’t think I would commit a sin that I know from the depths of who I am would be against God. If I do commit such a sin, I don’t think I would be in such a state of knowledge, for whatever particular reason.

In any case, you guys don’t have to worry about this. This is all up to God. Trust in his mercy and justice, and be vigilant about yourselves, helping others when you can.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I agree…

Perhaps you misunderstand, then.

Ok, here is person X. Person X commits a mortal sin. That means person X did something gravely wrong, KNEW it was gravely wrong, and fully and freely did it anyway. So. . .definite grave sin, no mitigating factors. Out and out bad.

Cut to person dying. Person could repent (and go to purgatory and then heaven) OR person could refuse to repent and choose hell. Freely.

Person chooses hell.

Now: In that choosing and remaining, person not only has not repented the previous mortal sin (so it is an ONGOING sin and will remain ONGOING SIN as long as the person is in hell, which is eternity). . .person is committing ANOTHER mortal sin on top of that – the mortal sin of rejecting God.

And the person commits THAT second sin likewise so long as person remains in hell–that is, eternity.

See? It is not, "person A committed a sin which lasted for say 10 ‘years of earthly time’ and should by the ‘apparent’ ‘logic’ of some posters be punished by 10 years of ‘time’ in hell and then ‘forgiven’.

It is person A committing a sin which lasted for the rest of his life, was NEVER repented (for all eternity) and then person A committing a further mortal sin of rejection of God which again is being ‘sinned’ constantly THROUGH ALL ETERNITY.

Now y’all can tell me how an ‘eternal’ mortal sin, unrepented, can be 'fairly and even mercifully treated other than the way God has ordained. How do you treat eternal mortal sin without having the person eternally separate from God if the PERSON never wishes to repent?

 

[Historicity]

They are only ridiculous if they don’t exist. We know they DO exist. So they aren’t ridiculous.

Please enlighten me to this proof of heaven and hell.

There are levels of heaven as there are levels of hell.

How does one come to this conclusion?

NO ONE bad will enter heaven, or heaven wouldn’t be heaven.

Bad is a pretty weak adjective to base an eternity with or without god on.

 

[DavidKays]

I wonder why when we are talking about sins that the majority tend to only deal with sins of commission and not sins of ommission. I noticed that Catholics are always engaged in talking about the bad things they do instead of dealing with the good things they neglect. Even us Orthodox are guilty on that one. We are so into sins of commission that we forget what will really make us Saints and that is talking, dealing, and confessing our sins of ommission. These the sins of ommission are much more difficult to get at and yet these are the ones that actually deter your growth in Holiness more than any other. You want to be Saintly and grow into more sanctification then deal also with your sins of ommission. These then once dwelt with will be able to help you to become more kinder, merciful. caring, gentler, to be at peace with yourself, thinking less of yourself and more about others, to be at the service of others and so on. The measuring stick must include both sins of commission and sins of ommission. Let me explain why I wrote this down. Since the post regards eternity in hell a disproportionate punishment I will let you know of a story that will illustrate what the thread means and to what I have written. One day St.Teresa of Avila was shown by God her place in hell. The Saint decided to do God’s work and she successfully transformed the whole Carmelite Order to what God wanted. Now why was she shown her place in hell. Now she has not committed any serious sins. So why? Can it not be for the lack of good that she can do. Can it not be for her own vocation. It isn’t for any sins of commission that she will do. Then it must be for any sins of ommission. This then is what the Saint must avoid! And so she did. For most Catholics and Orthodox we tend to deal too much on our own mistakes that we do not deal with the good we failed to do. Remember the scriptures where a person was given some talent but he or she wasted it and buried it. This is what we do when we do not deal with our lack of good. We bury it. These are our sins of ommission. God condemn the person for their lack of goodness more than their wicked deeds. So to we must be careful if we only deal with our wicked deeds. Many of us do not confess our sins of ommission and this way we bury whatever goodness God has given us. We need to be like St.Teresa of Avila and use the talents and gifts God has given us for His Glory so that His Church will benefit and be edified. If St.Teresa of Avila was shown her place in hell I wonder what we will do if God will show us our place in hell? Think about it. Will you respond like the Saint did and accomplish God’s will or will you postpone it like the person who in the Gospel decided to bury his gift and talent, to waste it and then receive a severe response from his Lord.

 

[ignatius777]

I often find myself having a hard time believing in the eternity of hell. I mean, even for Stalin or Hitler (if they’re there), wouldn’t, say, a million years be enough to suffer? And let’s say they are in hell for eternity as the Church teaches. Are you telling me that the person who deliberately and knowingly skipped Mass on Sunday, and a person who had premarital sex with his girlfriend (again, knowingly and deliberately) will spend the same eternity there??? That’s harsh, and seem like a disproportionate punishment.

I know some pretty devout Catholics who are getting pretty interested in so called Universalism, namely, that in the end, everyone, including the demons, will ultimately be reconciled to God. I saw a write-up about it in an ecumenical newsletter for Eastern Catholics and Orthodox. Universalism is gaining steam and people are giving it another look despite the fact that Origen was condemned for it so many centuries ago.

But ETERNITY for even one mortal sin? Sorry, I have a hard time accepting that. It just seems too unreasonable.

Sin is a CONSCIOUS decision to do something in opposition to what God expects of us. Its an insult to Jesus who was the faultless victim who paid the price for our sins. He died for us and He asks us to do a few things in praise to Him for the sacrifice and we cant bring ourselves to do what He asks? Really? Hell seems to easy a punishment for such ingratitude, dont you think?

 

[slywakka250]

Now: In that choosing and remaining, person not only has not repented the previous mortal sin (so it is an ONGOING sin and will remain ONGOING SIN as long as the person is in hell, which is eternity). . .person is committing ANOTHER mortal sin on top of that – the mortal sin of rejecting God.

The theory of mortal sin does not seem consistent.

So mortal sin merits an eternity in hell. To merit an eternal punishment, it seems the act of commiting a mortal sin ought to include the intention to seperate oneself from God eternally. As I often hear, no one can commit a mortal sin without knowledge of the seriousness of the sinful act.

SO, if order to merit eternal punishment, the sinner must know what he is doing when he commits mortal sin. If the sinner truly understands that the mortal sin has an eternal punishment attached to it, and chooses to sin anyway, has the sinner not made an eternal choice to be separated from God??

I can’t understand how someone can commit a mortal sin, and then somehow change his mind and repent. If the sinner can repent, I don’t see how it could have been a mortal sin in the first place. If the sinner changes his mind by asking for forgiveness, the sin wasn’t really one that amounted to an eternal choice, or else the sinner would not have changed his mind.

It comes down to the fact that nobody would willingly choose eternal torment. When people commit “mortal sin,” they do so to achieve some other apparent good like bodily pleasure, material possessions, etc. Often very good things in themselves, but lacking correct circumstances and intentions, the seeking of these things become mortally sinful.

I really can’t stand the idea that people choose hell just because they don’t take God seriously because they either don’t feel that God loves them, or just haven’t been given the gifts of faith and understanding.

Furthermore, if I somehow manage to avoid hell, and somebody else does not, that would mean that I have achieved the end of my existence while somebody else has failed to achieve is final cause and purpose as a human person. I am really upset by the idea that I might in the end be a “better” person than somebody else. Freely decided or not, I feel I have no right to seek to be “better” than anybody else. I like to think we are all equal before the God who loves us, no one more meritorious than anybody else.

 

[BTTG]

The soul is reunited with the body. And either returns body and soul to heaven or hell.

Souls before the resurrection and ascension of Jesus back to heaven, who were good, were in Abrahams bosom as it was called. A place of comfort and waiting. Heaven was not opened yet by Jesus.

After the ascension, souls are immediately in heaven (purgatory 1st if necessary) or hell

You mention that the “soul is reunited with the body”. Therefore, your equation would be 'soul" plus a “body” becomes a living soul.

soul + body = living soul

However, Gen. 2:7 states that the “breathe, or spirit” unites with the “dust, or body” to become a living soul.

spirit + body = living soul

The “spirit from God” and a “soul” are two different identities.

Regarding Lazarus, it is a parable about life, cannot be taken literal about what occurs at death.
Read the story again and think of:
Richman = Jews, more specifically the Pharisee
Lazarus = gentiles
Abraham’s bosom = closeness to Jesus - John 13:23; Isa 40:1; John 1:18;Deut 13:6
are we to communicate with the dead - deut. 18:10-11

written with love

 

[BTTG]

Yes

I’ve read your other posts. You think that when the body dies so does the soul. And you quote OT passages that says the soul dies. The question is, what does that mean?

**Jesus, The one who fulfills revelation, tells this story. **

The Rich Man and Lazarus

LK 16:
19 “There was a rich man who was dressed in purple and fine linen and lived in luxury every day. 20 At his gate was laid a beggar named Lazarus, covered with sores 21 and longing to eat what fell from the rich man’s table. Even the dogs came and licked his sores.

22 “The time came when the beggar died and the angels carried him to Abraham’s side. The rich man also died and was buried.23 In Hades, where he was in torment, he looked up and saw Abraham far away, with Lazarus by his side. 24 So he called to him, ‘Father Abraham, have pity on me and send Lazarus to dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, because I am in agony in this fire.’
25 “But Abraham replied, ‘Son, remember that in your lifetime you received your good things, while Lazarus received bad things, but now he is comforted here and you are in agony. 26 And besides all this, between us and you a great chasm has been set in place, so that those who want to go from here to you cannot, nor can anyone cross over from there to us.’
27 “He answered, ‘Then I beg you, father, send Lazarus to my family, 28 for I have five brothers. Let him warn them, so that they will not also come to this place of torment.’
29 “Abraham replied, ‘They have Moses and the Prophets; let them listen to them.’
30 “‘No, father Abraham,’ he said, ‘but if someone from the dead goes to them, they will repent.’ 31 “He said to him, ‘If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.’”

Notice the points

• Hades is a place of torment, Abraham is in a place of comfort. BOTH are fully aware of who they are and where they are.
• While people in the grave are dead, there is part of them that is fully alive. You don’t see it with your eyes, because your eyes see on a dead body
• The soul as you can see, has memory, intellect and will and lives forever. The rich man in Hades has full faculties of who he is, where he came from, and what he wants and desires. And he feels. All he can do now is suffer…terribly because he is in Hades.
• And he is aware that Abraham who his people haven’t seen in thousands of years, and who he is talking to now, asks a favor because Abraham is in a good place while the Rich man is in a place of torment.
• Is the soul of a good man or a bad man dead when the body dies? Nope! Does the soul only sleep when the body dies? Nope! The soul is immediately judged and goes immediately to heaven (purgatory 1st if necessary) or hell.

Is Jesus pulling a fast one on His listeners by telling this story? Is He contradicting the scriptures that you used? Nope!

The soul does NOT die. Grace in the soul dies. The only place then for that soul is hell. But as you can see, the soul is fully consious.

Is the story a parable or to be taken literally?

If the soul is going to live for eternity in hell or in heaven what does Jesus mean when He states. (Mat 10:28) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

note: the greek word “destroy” in this verse means to die, or perish.

written with love

 

[davidv]

You mention that the “soul is reunited with the body”. Therefore, your equation would be 'soul" plus a “body” becomes a living soul.

soul + body = living soul

However, Gen. 2:7 states that the “breathe, or spirit” unites with the “dust, or body” to become a living soul.

spirit + body = living soul

The “spirit from God” and a “soul” are two different identities.

Regarding Lazarus, it is a parable about life, cannot be taken literal about what occurs at death.
Read the story again and think of:
Richman = Jews, more specifically the Pharisee
Lazarus = gentiles
Abraham’s bosom = closeness to Jesus - John 13:23; Isa 40:1; John 1:18;Deut 13:6
are we to communicate with the dead - deut. 18:10-11

written with love

Your equation is not correct. It should be:
soul+body=human person

 

[davidv]

Is the story a parable or to be taken literally?

Both. There two senses of Scripture, the literal and the spiritual. The spiritual is built on the literal. Get the literal wrong and one gets the spiritual wrong.

If the soul is going to live for eternity in hell or in heaven what does Jesus mean when He states. (Mat 10:28) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

note: the greek word “destroy” in this verse means to die, or perish.

written with love

It appears in this context die or perish does not mean “cease to exit”.

One meaning then is that giving up the physical life can preserve ones spiritual life.

 

[Adam1986]

IMO****

I often find myself having a hard time believing in the eternity of hell. I mean, even for Stalin or Hitler (if they’re there), wouldn’t, say, a million years be enough to suffer?
NO.

And let’s say they are in hell for eternity as the Church teaches. Are you telling me that the person who deliberately and knowingly skipped Mass on Sunday, and a person who had premarital sex with his girlfriend (again, knowingly and deliberately) will spend the same eternity there??? That’s harsh, and seem like a disproportionate punishment.
I agree completely. The punishment has to fit the crime. Skipping Mass one week because you don’t feel like going or having sex does not equate eternal damnation. Killing over 6,000,000 people? Yeah that does.

I know some pretty devout Catholics who are getting pretty interested in so called Universalism, namely, that in the end, everyone, including the demons, will ultimately be reconciled to God. I saw a write-up about it in an ecumenical newsletter for Eastern Catholics and Orthodox. Universalism is gaining steam and people are giving it another look despite the fact that Origen was condemned for it so many centuries ago.
I disagree with that. Some people are evil and unrepentant. And evil belongs in Hell.

But ETERNITY for even one mortal sin? Sorry, I have a hard time accepting that. It just seems too unreasonable.

I feel EXACTLY the same way. AS LONG AS the the one mortal sin is not evil. IE murder, abortion, rape, etc.

 

[LilyM]

IMO****

I feel EXACTLY the same way. AS LONG AS the the one mortal sin is not evil. IE murder, abortion, rape, etc.

I’m sorry, but WHO gets to decide what exact acts are ‘evil’ enough to merit Hell and what acts aren’t? You seem to think it’s you.

Didn’t Jesus say outright that the mere deliberate entertaining of a lustful thought was equivalent morally to the sin of physically adultering with the object of one’s lust? Most people of the time - and now - would say ‘no way is the thought of adultery equivalent to the deed’. But in HIS eyes, which are the only eyes that count, the two are fully equivalent.

Didn’t He say that someone who called his brother ‘fool’ would suffer eternal hellfire? Another headscratcher, that something so apparently trivial would be SO offensive to God. But there it is, He said it and we can’t gainsay it.

He simply doesn’t think as we do about the seriousness of things. And He is the final arbiter, and teaches us about His standards through His mouthpiece, the Church. If we listen to her, and we are bound to listen to her and learn as much as we can about what she has to teach, then there are no excuses of ignorance available to us.

'Nuff said.

 

[steve_b]

You mention that the “soul is reunited with the body”. Therefore, your equation would be 'soul" plus a “body” becomes a living soul.

soul + body = living soul

However, Gen. 2:7 states that the “breathe, or spirit” unites with the “dust, or body” to become a living soul.

spirit + body = living soul

The “spirit from God” and a “soul” are two different identities.

[Gen 2:7] 7* then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.

therefore, Was man alive before his soul was infused? No

Spirit/soul is life, the flesh is nothing without the soul. [Jn 6:63]63* It is the spirit that gives life, the flesh is of no avail

spirit/soul + flesh = life of the flesh. Once created by God, The soul is immortal, the body is NOT.

spirit/soul - flesh = death of the flesh, but spirit/soul is still alive
B:

Regarding Lazarus, it is a parable about life, cannot be taken literal about what occurs at death.

It’s talking about what happens AFTER one dies. A common question virtually everyone has. Is it lights out till the 2nd coming, or does life continue beyond the grave after one closes their eyes?

A parable gives truth in story form, & the one who judges our life, after one dies, is telling the story about what happens AFTER death of the body. The body is buried, but the soul continues to live and has memory, intellect and will as was seen in the parable. And after death there is judgement. Because we see, there is rewards for friends of God and there is punishment for the one who is NOT in friendship with God. And rewards or punishment begins immediately after one dies and is immediately judged.

what part of what Jesus told us, do you think is NOT true
B:

Read the story again and think of:
Richman = Jews, more specifically the Pharisee
Lazarus = gentiles
Abraham’s bosom = closeness to Jesus - John 13:23; Isa 40:1; John 1:18;Deut 13:6

The richman can be ANYONE that fits the description Jesus gave. Lazarus can be anyone who fits THAT description. Abrahams bosom is an OT place of rest for souls who die in the friendship with God, but because Jesus hasn’t opened heaven yet for anyone, they wait. Likewise Jesus tells of torment and punishment for the soul who dies out of friendship with God. While the grave contains the dead body, the afterlife contains the soul, fully alive and ready to receive the rewards or punishment due after judgement of this life…
B:

are we to communicate with the dead - deut. 18:10-11

Obviously the richman, Lazarus, and Abraham, their bodies were in the grave, but their souls were fully functional and alive and able to experience their reality. And Jesus is telling us this is reality after death of the body.

 

[steve_b]

Is the story a parable or to be taken literally?

If the soul is going to live for eternity in hell or in heaven what does Jesus mean when He states. (Mat 10:28) And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.

note: the greek word “destroy” in this verse means to die, or perish.

written with love

He is able to destroy both. It doesn’t say He will destroy the soul in hell. Hell is for eternity and souls remain fully functional and in torment in hell as they remain fully functional and in bliss in heaven.

The word for destroy also means
render useless, to give over to eternal misery in hell, to be lost, ruined, to lose