Love and Justice: God Style! (An inquiry)

[Think_About_It]

Why did God create a system in which some or many or most of humanity will suffer eternal torment?

Note: I’m not really looking for whether people land themselves in hell, or whether God gave us sufficient warning, etc. I merely want to know why God devised a system where those he loved dearly (more than anyone could ever love anyone) would suffer eternally for their sins, instead of creating a system where they do, in fact, achieve salvation somehow - all of them.

Thanks in advance for your replies!

 

[Ferds_Guiang]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this section on Hell. hope this helps clarify things a bit:

IV. HELL

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self- exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”

1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"614

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."616

Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth."617

1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;618 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:619

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.620

 

[Think_About_It]

Thank you for replying!

Mmh, I remember reading this at a time of well-wrought belief in my life, and thinking it was very attractive, certainly not because the mandate on humanity was very demanding in order to avoid hell (i.e., achieve salvation), but because it spared God the tyranny we might otherwise [falsely] imupte to him. Nevertheless, allow me to bold the some things that I don’t need answered (e.g., how it’s we who put ourselves in hell by our wicked ways, and not God)

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this section on Hell. hope this helps clarify things a bit:

IV. HELL

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God **if we sin gravely **against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of **definitive self- exclusion **from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”

1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives **refuse to believe **and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"614

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the **responsibility incumbent upon man **to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."616

Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth."617

1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;618 for this, **a willful turning away **from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:619

Many perish (and indeed, only a few enter). Even keeping in mind that it is we who alone are responsible for working out our salvation, why is the system so demanding that only few can enter the narrow gate? If God desired that no man perishes, why did He, in his omniscience, create a system where most men would perish (or a system that could be corrupted to the point where most men perish)?

Speculations are acceptable. I’m just curious as to what people think.

 

[camerong]

Its not at all clear that MOST people go to hell. Allusions to the narrow gate, visions of the saints, etc., can be read as symbolic rather than literal statistics as to our destinies after life. I strongly suspect (my speculation) that relatively few people go to hell, and by definition (not my speculation) those that go to hell desire to be separated from God. It’s not as if God creates a system that punishes people; it’s as if God is sitting in a mansion with seats at the banquet for everyone, calls out to people outside of the mansion to join him, and some chose not to come in. Is God at fault for not sending out armed guards to round up people?

Many orthodox Catholic theologians have posed the possibility of a final choice at death, so that even those who purposefully turned from God their whole lives might have another chance to change their minds. I have also heard it said from similar sources that anyone in hell *choses *to be there. After all, whenever we interpret what we learn about God’s judgment and the afterlife, we must remain mindful of God’s infinite love and mercy. So even when we find it difficult to harmonize passages about narrow gates with passages about God loving every soul, we should remember that all of this is far beyond our comprehension, and that whatever “system” is in place was created by Love and Mercy Itself.

 

[Think_About_It]

Its not at all clear that MOST people go to hell. Allusions to the narrow gate, visions of the saints, etc., can be read as symbolic rather than literal statistics as to our destinies after life. I strongly suspect (my speculation) that relatively few people go to hell, and by definition (not my speculation) those that go to hell desire to be separated from God. It’s not as if God creates a system that punishes people; it’s as if God is sitting in a mansion with seats at the banquet for everyone, calls out to people outside of the mansion to join him, and some chose not to come in. Is God at fault for not sending out armed guards to round up people?

Many orthodox Catholic theologians have posed the possibility of a final choice at death, so that even those who purposefully turned from God their whole lives might have another chance to change their minds. I have also heard it said from similar sources that anyone in hell *choses *to be there. After all, whenever we interpret what we learn about God’s judgment and the afterlife, we must remain mindful of God’s infinite love and mercy. So even when we find it difficult to harmonize passages about narrow gates with passages about God loving every soul, we should remember that all of this is far beyond our comprehension, and that whatever “system” is in place was created by Love and Mercy Itself.

You’re focusing on how people do it to themselves, as if God were bound by the system he created. It is possible (that is all I’m saying) that God could have created a system in which people could still reject him, but not be eternally tormented. If he desires that we are all saved, why from the outset did he not gaurantee it? God has the power to gain what he desires and creates a system that He knows it’s not going to happen in. It speaks either to cruelty or ineptitude.

If people can make the choice at death and forget about all the before, then religious sanctions may very well be in vain. At the end of your life, even having behaved very wickedly, you could decide very easily that you didn’t want to suffer eternally. Without the weight of sin which impedes us so heavily in the flesh, the decision would probably be an easy one.

How are we to be convinced not that God’s plan isn’t just by some branch of reasoning, but that He could not have devised a system where He gets exactly what He desires? It seems odd. He is limitless and perfect, yet is unable or doesn’t will to create a system where He will not get exactly what he desires.

 

[camerong]

You’re focusing on how people do it to themselves, as if God were bound by the system he created. It is possible (that is all I’m saying) that God could have created a system in which people could still reject him, but not be eternally tormented. If he desires that we are all saved, why from the outset did he not gaurantee it? God has the power to gain what he desires and creates a system that He knows it’s not going to happen in. It speaks either to cruelty or ineptitude.

Let me first say I appreciate the respectfulness with which you treat the topic. Rarely does a non-theist (as I presume you are) debate so graciously. Its easy for non-Christians to be flippant about our beliefs.

God’s desires are for people to freely chose to love him. How could he make it so that certainly happens? If he forces it, by creating a system in which that is the only possibility, then it is not a free choice.

If people can make the choice at death and forget about all the before, then religious sanctions may very well be in vain. At the end of your life, even having behaved very wickedly, you could decide very easily that you didn’t want to suffer eternally. Without the weight of sin which impedes us so heavily in the flesh, the decision would probably be an easy one.

This is very likely true even of repentance just before death, no? All Catholics would agree that the worst person in the world could repent prior to death and avoid damnation. Some Catholics–myself included–belief that such a choice is also possible at death, in which someone has a clearer mind than perhaps in life, as you correctly observe.

But I’m not sure of your point. What religious sanctions?

How are we to be convinced not that God’s plan isn’t just by some branch of reasoning, but that He could not have devised a system where He gets exactly what He desires? It seems odd. He is limitless and perfect, yet is unable or doesn’t will to create a system where He will not get exactly what he desires.

I’ve considered this before. There is a related argument–can God create a stone so big He cannot lift it? The answer to this quandary is no, He could not. Not because He can’t create a big enough stone, but because a stone so big God cannot lift it is a meaningless entity. It is like a number that is both prime and not prime. (Bear with me to see the connection)

In this same way, God cannot create a system where we can be forced to freely chose him, because such a thing is not possible. This does not reflect a limitation on God.

Now, you may ask (and I think you are asking) why must God have created a system in which some people will inevitably not chose him and thereby suffer? Wouldn’t it have been better for him to never create such people? Its like me breeding puppies only to harm them. I could have not bred them in the first place, and that would have been better.

That’s an interesting question, but I’m afraid its one that is beyond our ability to understand. I don’t want this to seem like a cop-out, but think about it–we are asking whether it would be better for the universe to have never existed. This involves weighing two alternatives–and one alternative is not imaginable to us. So we can’t possible seek to say that one is more better than another. And if we can’t say that not existing is better than existing, we can’t say that God was wrong for choosing to make us exist. And, let me finally add, anyone asserting that God acted immorally (or cruelly) has the burden of showing that not existing would have been superior to existing. Since that cannot be shown, such an assertion fails. I realize you were not making such an assertion and only inquiring, but its useful I think to address things in terms of assertions.

 

[1WATCHER]

The Catechism of the Catholic Church has this section on Hell. hope this helps clarify things a bit:

IV. HELL

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."610 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.611 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self- exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”

1034 Jesus often speaks of “Gehenna” of “the unquenchable fire” reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.612 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"613 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"614

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."616

Since we know neither the day nor the hour, we should follow the advice of the Lord and watch constantly so that, when the single course of our earthly life is completed, we may merit to enter with him into the marriage feast and be numbered among the blessed, and not, like the wicked and slothful servants, be ordered to depart into the eternal fire, into the outer darkness where "men will weep and gnash their teeth."617

1037 God predestines no one to go to hell;618 for this, a willful turning away from God (a mortal sin) is necessary, and persistence in it until the end. In the Eucharistic liturgy and in the daily prayers of her faithful, the Church implores the mercy of God, who does not want “any to perish, but all to come to repentance”:619

Father, accept this offering
from your whole family.
Grant us your peace in this life,
save us from final damnation,
and count us among those you have chosen.620

camerong Re: Love and Justice: God Style! (An inquiry)

---

Quote:
Originally Posted by Think About It
You’re focusing on how people do it to themselves, as if God were bound by the system he created. It is possible (that is all I’m saying) that God could have created a system in which people could still reject him, but not be eternally tormented. If he desires that we are all saved, why from the outset did he not gaurantee it? God has the power to gain what he desires and creates a system that He knows it’s not going to happen in. It speaks either to cruelty or ineptitude.

Let me first say I appreciate the respectfulness with which you treat the topic. Rarely does a non-theist (as I presume you are) debate so graciously. Its easy for non-Christians to be flippant about our beliefs.

God’s desires are for people to freely chose to love him. How could he make it so that certainly happens? If he forces it, by creating a system in which that is the only possibility, then it is not a free choice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Think About It
If people can make the choice at death and forget about all the before, then religious sanctions may very well be in vain. At the end of your life, even having behaved very wickedly, you could decide very easily that you didn’t want to suffer eternally. Without the weight of sin which impedes us so heavily in the flesh, the decision would probably be an easy one.

This is very likely true even of repentance just before death, no? All Catholics would agree that the worst person in the world could repent prior to death and avoid damnation. Some Catholics–myself included–belief that such a choice is also possible at death, in which someone has a clearer mind than perhaps in life, as you correctly observe.

But I’m not sure of your point. What religious sanctions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Think About It
How are we to be convinced not that God’s plan isn’t just by some branch of reasoning, but that He could not have devised a system where He gets exactly what He desires? It seems odd. He is limitless and perfect, yet is unable or doesn’t will to create a system where He will not get exactly what he desires.

I’ve considered this before. There is a related argument–can God create a stone so big He cannot lift it? The answer to this quandary is no, He could not. Not because He can’t create a big enough stone, but because a stone so big God cannot lift it is a meaningless entity. It is like a number that is both prime and not prime. (Bear with me to see the connection)

In this same way, God cannot create a system where we can be forced to freely chose him, because such a thing is not possible. This does not reflect a limitation on God.

Now, you may ask (and I think you are asking) why must God have created a system in which some people will inevitably not chose him and thereby suffer? Wouldn’t it have been better for him to never create such people? Its like me breeding puppies only to harm them. I could have not bred them in the first place, and that would have been better.

That’s an interesting question, but I’m afraid its one that is beyond our ability to understand. I don’t want this to seem like a cop-out, but think about it–we are asking whether it would be better for the universe to have never existed. This involves weighing two alternatives–and one alternative is not imaginable to us. So we can’t possible seek to say that one is more better than another. And if we can’t say that not existing is better than existing, we can’t say that God was wrong for choosing to make us exist. And, let me finally add, anyone asserting that God acted immorally (or cruelly) has the burden of showing that not existing would have been superior to existing. Since that cannot be shown, such an assertion fails. I realize you were not making such an assertion and only inquiring, but its useful I think to address things in terms of assertions.

Both post are really great response’s and fulfill a loving way to bring those who lost their way for the moment. And allow them to rethink Gods grace and mercyful ways and offer a way to return to him…

 

[Think_About_It]

We are asking whether it would be better for the universe to have never existed. This involves weighing two alternatives–and one alternative is not imaginable to us. So we can’t possible seek to say that one is more better than another. And if we can’t say that not existing is better than existing, we can’t say that God was wrong for choosing to make us exist. And, let me finally add, anyone asserting that God acted immorally (or cruelly) has the burden of showing that not existing would have been superior to existing. Since that cannot be shown, such an assertion fails. I realize you were not making such an assertion and only inquiring, but its useful I think to address things in terms of assertions.

I’m not necessarily implying anything about existing or not existing. I understand it cannot be demonstrated logically how one could be better or worse than the other. But there can be no constraints on a perfect, all-loving being such as even Christians impute to Him. Start from here: Particulars aside, it is entirely possible that God could have created a world in which people have free will and yet no suffering takes place either in this world or in the world to come. He could have and He didn’t. I don’t think it is like the rock so heavy, even He cannot lift it. To say that God could not have created a system with free will and no evil represents either a poverty of the imagination, a limitation on God’s part, or a refusal to acknowledge that many things are possible, even beyond our understanding of theology as it is now. I’m not going to lay out the particulars because there are an infinite number of rationalizations to say why it’s not perfect, or how God’s plan is better. I will say, however, that a conceivable universe exists where 1. God is the creator 2. we have free will 3. everyone lives happily ever after. This is not the case. In God’s perfect system, the bulletpoint is ever before us: people can perish.