The problem of hell solutions?

[CRV]

most people can’t truly know if they met the three criteria for an act such as masturbation to be a mortal sin, so it is better to assume that you did and act accordingly.

I’d say that if someone who out of boredom masturbated (grave matter), knowing that it is a mortal sin (full knowledge), and then freely decides to masturbate (full consent of the will) - yep, I’d say in this scenario it was committed.

 

[RealisticCatholic]

Well, the magisterium has tended to go away from this understanding.

Hell is oftentimes viewed as a punishment for past sin, and there are implications of this in both the New Testament scriptures and in theological reflection throughout the centuries.37The idea of punishment is not accentuated in the definition from the Catechism of the Catholic Church (here after CCC)which emphasizes the self-exclusion of people from communion with God and the blessed. How can the views of “punishment” from the Synoptic Gospels and the Church tradition be reconciled with the notion of “self-exclusion from communion” given in the CCC)?

As noted above, the Catholic Church had to reconcile several different New Testament passages to synthesize its doctrine on hell. In addition to the passages on punishment from the Synoptic Gospels, there are also passages on the unconditional love of God (Lk 15: 1-7 and Lk 15: 11-32) and passages on people without compassion or empathy moving on the path toward hell (Lk 16: 19-31 and Mt25: 31-46). The Church reconciles the tension in these passages by taking the emphasis off of punishment as “God’s action” and places it on “the actions of a person who freely rejects love and communion with God and others” (a form of self-punishment).

The definition of “hell” in the CCC emphasizes self-punishment(self-exclusion) instead of “punishment by God.” This position is consistent with other teachings of Jesus –such as God’s unconditional love and the definitive power of human freedom to reject God, love, and others. This emphasis assures that God is not viewed as either a “justice machine” (meting out justice in a heartless, mechanical fashion) or “an angry God who needs to get even with sinners with whom he has run out of patience.” Both of these notions of “God” are irreconcilable with Jesus’ teaching about the Father of the Prodigal Son, Abba, the beatitudes, and love as the highest commandment.

https://www.crediblecatholic.com/pdf/M5/BB5.pdf#P1V5C8

 

[Annie]

The idea of God having to eternally punish someone for a finite mortal sin is related to a mythic and anthropomorphic view of God.

I don’t know that this is necessarily true, but the idea that God eternally punishes us is certainly the idea that God gave us.

 

[goout]

What possible sin made by an human of finite knowledge and understanding during our relatively short time here on earth can merit the punishment of eternal suffering in hell?

How can human beings be united in the beatific vision together, praising God and living in eternal love?

 

[CRV]

God is a loving God, but He is also a Just God.

By commiting a mortal sin, we are choosing to exclude ourselves from being with God in heaven, so I agree with you there and the CCC #1033 “This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.””

But the CCC then goes on to say in 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,”(Bold and Italics are mine + unquenchable = unending=eternity. Body … unquenchable fire … suffering)

In #1035 it says: “The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. … The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God” (Bold emphasis is mine).

So yes, while punishment for sin is not specifically mentioned in the CCC, there must be punishment as that would be just. God is not only merciful but He is also a Just God. The opposite is the reward of the just - an eternity in heaven with God.

So punishment is the counterpart to reward.

What are souls being punished for? For the mortal and unrepented sins they committed in life.

Contra Gentiles Book 3 Providence Part II Chapter 140 That a Man’s Acts Are Punished Or Rewarded By God.

EWTN - Hell down the bottom of which is a *[Note: … Thus, after the general resurrection the bodies of the damned, being bodies not spirits, must be in “some place,” in which they will receive the punishment of fire.] (Bold and Italics are mine). Comes from a General Audience of Wednesday, 28 July 1999, St Pope John Paul II.

The Hell There Is! search using the term “punishment”.

Eternal Punishment by Rev. William G. Most

Catholic Answers Encyclopedia Hell Treatment of the doctrine of hell 11/19/2018 scroll down to the sections starting with POENA DAMNI.

I believe that the punishments are a consequence of the mortal sins we commit. That God is not one sided - all mercy, but is also a Just God. That these punishments are from within and without. That there are different degrees of punishment/torment/suffering as corresponding to the sins committed. The same as I believe the merits or crown of glory a soul has in heaven is awarded/rewarded by God according to the good the soul did in life.

 

[opop]

Hell is not simply a punishment for a past sin. It’s also punishment for a present state of will. In other words, a damned man doesn’t regret the past mortal sin(s) he has done; and as long as he doesn’t regret it he remains in hell. And since it’s impossible to change one’s state of will after death (either from good to evil, or from evil to good), it follows that whoever ends up in hell remains there forever.
Now, what makes it impossible to change one’s will after death? I’m not sure that the Church has a definitive answer for that yet. I heard some theories. One theory says that, in order to change our mind, there must be some kind of change in our experience, situation or knowledge, that makes us reconsider our previous choice. And since we have a temporal experience of the world, we can always find a further motive to change our mind. But after death we will no longer live in the temporal world. Therefore there’s nothing that could change in order to make us reconsider our past choices. I don’t find this theory totally convincing as such, but perhaps there’s some truth in it. Also, perhpas one day the Church will make a clear statement on the matter.

 

[Ana_v]

What possible good can a finite human being accomplish that merits eterenal life?

There you have it

Um, isn’t the whole point of the Incarnation and Redemption intended to merit for man what he cannot merit for himself without grace?

Man not being able to merit eternal life by himself does not in any way undermine the OP’s question. It just serves to further illustrate his point that a finite cause cannot achieve an infinite effect.

There you have it.

 

[goout]

po18guy:

What possible good can a finite human being accomplish that merits eterenal life?

There you have it

Um, isn’t the whole point of the Incarnation and Redemption intended to merit for man what he cannot merit for himself without grace?

Man not being able to merit eternal life by himself does not in any way undermine the OP’s question. It just serves to further illustrate his point that a finite cause cannot achieve an infinite effect.

There you have it.

The OP’s question views life as disconnected parts.
Human beings live life as a whole, accepting the good with the bad. We can’t deal with what we won’t accept.
Hell is a reality. The consequences of sin are a reality. Calling God into the dock is not wholesome or holistic.
If you are calling God into the dock for evil, or for consequences, you should call God into the dock for all the blessings of life.

@po18guy is pointing this out, if I read correctly.