The Problem of Hell

[Aleii]

The mistake I meant to refer to would be thinking that if you were God you would do things differently. It sounds like you’re trying to avoid that mistake.

To (1), no one chooses hell as such, right? If you keep that in mind that should help. For example, say a murderer is executed and goes to hell. He chose to murder and he is executed and goes to hell as a result of his choice. He may wish to escape punishment, but too bad for him.

I don’t want to come off as trying to justify something like murder. What I mean by 1, is that the ‘rulebook’ is not a clearcut thing that if you do X you will get eternal punishment. If you don’t have full knowledge I don’t know how you can be considered to be making a clear choice. We’re talking about eternal suffering here, not merely 100 years of jail, this is extremely serious, extremely important information that not everyone understands to be true.

To (2), I don’t see the difficulty. I should think that it would be harder to understand choices which we *can *‘go back’ on. Is there any reason to assume that all choices we make should be revocable? …or that there shouldn’t be limits to our free will?

‘no going back’ is probably the wrong phrase to use. What I mean by that is that there is no chance of trying to make amends, no hope for forgiveness, no opportunity to attempt to make things right. The door is shut forever. And when you say limits to free will… well so much of Catholicism is based on the idea that humans have free will. To suddenly say it is limited at the time when you could argue that one needs it the most, that seems strange to say the least. Humans are fallible, and to have someone have eternal suffering for a mistake does not seem just or loving. I do think that all choices we make we should be able to apologize for and have the opportunity to be welcomed back home. I see that as loving, and don’t understand how the opposite is considered loving too.

To (3), it seems that annihilation would be convenient - but hardly necessarily more loving. To me annihilation seems to be a nihilist kind of desire - do whatever you want, the worst that justice will have to offer you is your own acquired state of nothingness - which, as the Epicureans noted, is nothing to fear. A promise of annihilation for evil-doers is a promise of no punishment (punishment requires an existing punishee).

Not necessarily. One could be punished for a period of time if necessary for justice, and then be annihilated. Punishment makes sense to me, but eternal punishment doesn’t. Going to the free will topic again, I never consented/chose to be born, I never chose to consent to the rules of eternal life/eternal suffering, so it seems loving that I should have the choice to end it.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Attempts by the finite to grasp the infinite.

We have been informed of the Truth: Hell exists. Does one accept or reject the Truth?

Bishop Fulton Sheen (probably paraphrased) : A Lie is still a Lie if everyone believes it. The Truth is still the Truth if no one believes it.

The Liar does not have to convince that there is no God. All it has to do is convince that there is no Liar.

 

[Aleii]

Attempts by the finite to grasp the infinite.

We have been informed of the Truth: Hell exists. Does one accept or reject the Truth?

Bishop Fulton Sheen (probably paraphrased) : A Lie is still a Lie if everyone believes it. The Truth is still the Truth if no one believes it.

The Liar does not have to convince that there is no God. All it has to do is convince that there is no Liar.

There are thousands of religions out there that each preach different ‘truths’. How can one really reject the truth if they don’t understand that it is THE truth?

I think it is my duty to God to thoroughly try to understand a religion lest I worship God in the wrong way.

 

[Aleii]

Another point - think of the parable of the prodigal son. While on the surface it is a difficult story, it teaches quite a powerful lesson about love, forgiveness, and that God is always there with open arms to welcome us home.

So how does this story fit with one who is in hell for eternity?

 

[fhansen]

Another point - think of the parable of the prodigal son. While on the surface it is a difficult story, it teaches quite a powerful lesson about love, forgiveness, and that God is always there with open arms to welcome us home.

So how does this story fit with one who is in hell for eternity?

The Prodigal was essentially already in hell. He had to wise up, come to appreciate the father, and return home. That was his part. Otherwise he could opt to stay in the pigsty.

The gospel could probably be summed up as, Thou shall Love–or be miserable.

 

[Aleii]

The Prodigal was essentially already in hell. He had to wise up, come to appreciate the father, and return home. That was his part. Otherwise he could opt to stay in the pigsty.

The gospel could probably be summed up as, Thou shall Love–or be miserable.

Exactly, but those in hell have no opportunity to come home.

 

[fhansen]

Exactly, but those in hell have no opportunity to come home.

Yes, and as has been said before, maybe that’s their final decision, because the thought of being with God is even worse to them. I still maintain that, with God, all will be well-justice will be done in love, however it’s worked out by Him.

 

[Aleii]

Yes, and as has been said before, maybe that’s their final decision, because the thought of being with God is even worse to them. I still maintain that, with God, all will be well-justice will be done in love, however it’s worked out by Him.

And as I have said before, saying that it is a final decision means no more free will and doesn’t allow for redemption of a mistake - I don’t get how that is loving. This isn’t some small issue here, it is more than trillions of years of suffering - that scale of suffering should horrify every one of us.

But I don’t deny that God’s will will be done in an omnibenevolent and just way. I just don’t see how the Catholic explanation fits.

 

[fhansen]

And as I have said before, saying that it is a final decision means no more free will and doesn’t allow for redemption of a mistake - I don’t get how that is loving. This isn’t some small issue here, it is more than trillions of years of suffering - that scale of suffering should horrify every one of us.

But I don’t deny that God’s will will be done in an omnibenevolent and just way. I just don’t see how the Catholic explanation fits.

Well, by final, I mean eternally, continuously final. That’s their adamant stance. I don’t see how else it would work. But as we don’t know much about any of it, I’ll still let God sweat the details and trust in His love and justice. The Catholic position simply deals with what she considers to be revealed knowledge-knowledge that she cannot in good conscience play fast and loose with.

And when I said, Thou shall love–or be miserable, I’m thinking along the lines of a direct cause and effect relationship, as in lack of love=misery.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

This is where grace and mercy (neither which is man-made) are essential to the Truth.

The Truth does not come from people, the Truth is revealed by God. Without God there is no Truth. God’s Mercy has revealed the Truth and His Grace has permitted us to accept it.

And, for reasons known only to God, we die. Essentially: “time’s up”.

Final Judgment.

Heaven or Hell. Ultimately. Forever.

That’s the way it is. Why? For some it’s an unknown, for some it’s the “million dollar question”, for others it’s a topic of investigation, for some, it is.

For many, that’s where this “God thing” or “Jesus stuff” falls apart: How could a loving God do this to us? When the question should be: “How could we do this to a loving God?” Instead of being served, we should serve. The roots are in Pride and because of Pride we do evil unto ourselves. Because of this evil we don’t deserve Heaven, we should be cast into Hell. An intriguing question: Why would a loving God pollute Heaven with evil? (He doesn’t and if Earth is any indication, thanks be to God for Heaven).

For the people around us, we don’t know how they will be judged. We can’t judge their souls. We don’t know everything. We can try to help as best we can and we are instructed to do so. In the end (“times up”), God knows everything and the Final Judgment will be Just and Right and the condemned will know why. No slick lawyers, no inadmissible evidence, no plea deals, no lies, no corruption, no politics. Just Truth.

 

[Moontown_Rabbit]

And as I have said before, saying that it is a final decision means no more free will and doesn’t allow for redemption of a mistake - I don’t get how that is loving. This isn’t some small issue here, it is more than trillions of years of suffering - that scale of suffering should horrify every one of us. But I don’t deny that God’s will will be done in an omnibenevolent and just way. I just don’t see how the Catholic explanation fits.

Someone may have mentioned this before, but aren’t you really talking about purgatory? From what I have been taught this is a place like hell except that you can eventually escape from it. Catholics take a lot of flak for believing in purgatory, but perhaps hell is like purgatory except that it contains the irredeemably prideful (as suggested above) and purgatory is like hell except that it contains those with enough humility to change. If so the Church has already addressed your objection.

 

[dcastlen50]

I apologize for the name. The question being discussed here has looked at how or why a person might be sentenced to hell. The author of the above movie suggests how this might happen. If you disagree with his portrayal you could explain why, or we can start up a new thread about who has the most stupid alias.

Gosh, I am sorry Moontown Rabbit. It was attempt at levity; I enjoy reading your comments.

 

[Betterave]

I don’t want to come off as trying to justify something like murder. What I mean by 1, is that the ‘rulebook’ is not a clearcut thing that if you do X you will get eternal punishment. If you don’t have full knowledge I don’t know how you can be considered to be making a clear choice. We’re talking about eternal suffering here, not merely 100 years of jail, this is extremely serious, extremely important information that not everyone understands to be true.

Well I’m not sure what you mean by full knowledge, but obviously one of the conditions for committing mortal sin (for getting a ticket to hell) is full knowledge, right? And to the point about the rulebook not being clearcut, that’s why God is judge - it is clearcut to Him (He is omniscient), and He is perfectly just (He is not merely omnipotent).

‘no going back’ is probably the wrong phrase to use. What I mean by that is that there is no chance of trying to make amends, no hope for forgiveness, no opportunity to attempt to make things right. The door is shut forever. And when you say limits to free will… well so much of Catholicism is based on the idea that humans have free will. To suddenly say it is limited at the time when you could argue that one needs it the most, that seems strange to say the least. Humans are fallible, and to have someone have eternal suffering for a mistake does not seem just or loving. I do think that all choices we make we should be able to apologize for and have the opportunity to be welcomed back home. I see that as loving, and don’t understand how the opposite is considered loving too.

Right, but there is no reason to think that someone who is damned will ever repent. You might have thought that no one would ever rebel against God in the first place - but they do. And you might think that everyone who rebels will change their minds eventually and wish to be reconciled - but they won’t (or so we believe) - and what reason would you have for thinking that anyway? There’s no point in leaving the door open forever if it is clear that the invitation to enter has been refused.

Not necessarily. One could be punished for a period of time if necessary for justice, and then be annihilated. Punishment makes sense to me, but eternal punishment doesn’t. Going to the free will topic again, I never consented/chose to be born, I never chose to consent to the rules of eternal life/eternal suffering, so it seems loving that I should have the choice to end it.

The human desire to be God, against God (to contravene justice, to be Lord over life and death/existence and non-existence), has nothing to do with evidence that God is not loving. I think you probably recognize that it makes no sense to require God to ask for the consent of creatures to their being created, but the desire to undo God’s creation in the way you suggest is just another form of rebellion against God, deserving of punishment, is it not?

God certainly could punish the unrepentant for a time and then annihilate them - but what would be the point?

I posted this earlier in the thread, but I’ll do so again, as I think it’s worth reflecting on:

‘My son,’ said the courteous Master [Virgil] ‘all those that die in the wrath of God assemble here from every land; and they are eager to cross the river [to enter hell], for divine justice so spurs them that fear turns to desire.’ (Dante, Inferno, Canto III)

Note: It is not that they care for the divine justice, but that the divine justice operates in their perversity; they work out their own damnation and are headlong and eager in it and cannot now be otherwise, for their sin is their doom. (John D. Sinclair, 1979)

 

[Aleii]

Well, by final, I mean eternally, continuously final. That’s their adamant stance. I don’t see how else it would work. But as we don’t know much about any of it, I’ll still let God sweat the details and trust in His love and justice. The Catholic position simply deals with what she considers to be revealed knowledge-knowledge that she cannot in good conscience play fast and loose with.

And when I said, Thou shall love–or be miserable, I’m thinking along the lines of a direct cause and effect relationship, as in lack of love=misery.

Everything you say makes sense, except if someone is suffering it seems like they would try to change their lot.

This is where grace and mercy (neither which is man-made) are essential to the Truth.

The Truth does not come from people, the Truth is revealed by God. Without God there is no Truth. God’s Mercy has revealed the Truth and His Grace has permitted us to accept it.

And, for reasons known only to God, we die. Essentially: “time’s up”.

Final Judgment.

Heaven or Hell. Ultimately. Forever.

That’s the way it is. Why? For some it’s an unknown, for some it’s the “million dollar question”, for others it’s a topic of investigation, for some, it is.

For many, that’s where this “God thing” or “Jesus stuff” falls apart: How could a loving God do this to us? When the question should be: “How could we do this to a loving God?” Instead of being served, we should serve. The roots are in Pride and because of Pride we do evil unto ourselves. Because of this evil we don’t deserve Heaven, we should be cast into Hell. An intriguing question: Why would a loving God pollute Heaven with evil? (He doesn’t and if Earth is any indication, thanks be to God for Heaven).

For the people around us, we don’t know how they will be judged. We can’t judge their souls. We don’t know everything. We can try to help as best we can and we are instructed to do so. In the end (“times up”), God knows everything and the Final Judgment will be Just and Right and the condemned will know why. No slick lawyers, no inadmissible evidence, no plea deals, no lies, no corruption, no politics. Just Truth.

Yes, one thing I fall back on is that a good God will judge righteously.

Someone may have mentioned this before, but aren’t you really talking about purgatory? From what I have been taught this is a place like hell except that you can eventually escape from it. Catholics take a lot of flak for believing in purgatory, but perhaps hell is like purgatory except that it contains the irredeemably prideful (as suggested above) and purgatory is like hell except that it contains those with enough humility to change. If so the Church has already addressed your objection.

Yes, purgatory I have no qualms with. Purgatory seems like hell ‘with a chance’. Why not just put everyone in purgatory, and if some stay forever due to their ‘choice’, then so be it? Purgatory offers hope, hell offers none.

 

[Aleii]

Betterave:

Well I’m not sure what you mean by full knowledge, but obviously one of the conditions for committing mortal sin (for getting a ticket to hell) is full knowledge, right? And to the point about the rulebook not being clearcut, that’s why God is judge - it is clearcut to Him (He is omniscient), and He is perfectly just (He is not merely omnipotent).

Right, that makes sense

Right, but there is no reason to think that someone who is damned will ever repent.

Why is that not ever a possibility? 100 years sets someone’s heart so cold that trillions of years will not change it?

You might have thought that no one would ever rebel against God in the first place - but they do.

I understand that humans are fallible and make mistakes so I can see how some people would temporarily go against God.

And you might think that everyone who rebels will change their minds eventually and wish to be reconciled - but they won’t (or so we believe) - and what reason would you have for thinking that anyway? There’s no point in leaving the door open forever if it is clear that the invitation to enter has been refused.

I think that it makes sense that rebels can change their mind because humans change their mind all the time. If someone is going to be continuously punished, it seems they would have the desire to figure out how to decrease that pain.

The human desire to be God, against God (to contravene justice, to be Lord over life and death/existence and non-existence), has nothing to do with evidence that God is not loving. I think you probably recognize that it makes no sense to require God to ask for the consent of creatures to their being created, but the desire to undo God’s creation in the way you suggest is just another form of rebellion against God, deserving of punishment, is it not?

I agree that human errors against God has nothing to do with God not being loving, but I don’t see how suffering with no chance of it ending is loving.

God certainly could punish the unrepentant for a time and then annihilate them - but what would be the point?

The point of annihilation would be a chance to end suffering. It seems like it would be an end to the tragedy of the soul in hell.

I posted this earlier in the thread, but I’ll do so again, as I think it’s worth reflecting on:

‘My son,’ said the courteous Master [Virgil] ‘all those that die in the wrath of God assemble here from every land; and they are eager to cross the river [to enter hell], for divine justice so spurs them that fear turns to desire.’ (Dante, Inferno, Canto III)

Note: It is not that they care for the divine justice, but that the divine justice operates in their perversity; they work out their own damnation and are headlong and eager in it and cannot now be otherwise, for their sin is their doom. (John D. Sinclair, 1979)

I quoted New Advent earlier which said “the damned never experience even the least real pleasure” - so how could one be eager for endless pain?

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

There is Purgatory.

How long does it last? Don’t know. Maybe it is what we would think of as 100 trillion years or longer. Even so, 100 trillion years (squared!) is nothing compared to eternity.

 

[Betterave]

Originally Posted by Moontown_Rabbit
Someone may have mentioned this before, but aren’t you really talking about purgatory? From what I have been taught this is a place like hell except that you can eventually escape from it. Catholics take a lot of flak for believing in purgatory, but perhaps hell is like purgatory except that it contains the irredeemably prideful (as suggested above) and purgatory is like hell except that it contains those with enough humility to change. If so the Church has already addressed your objection.

Yes, purgatory I have no qualms with. Purgatory seems like hell ‘with a chance’. Why not just put everyone in purgatory, and if some stay forever due to their ‘choice’, then so be it? Purgatory offers hope, hell offers none.

My understanding of purgatory (and the Church’s understanding, I believe) is very different. Purgatory is essentially a place of hope, it is for the redeemed. There is no question that eventually you CAN escape from it - it is definitively a temporary state of purification where pain is always tempered by the joy of knowing that one is being saved, purified for heaven.

 

[Betterave]

Why is that not ever a possibility? 100 years sets someone’s heart so cold that trillions of years will not change it?

Correct. Someone can live to 100 and have a heart so cold - so why would trillions of years change it? The general point to keep in mind, though, is that hell is not like earth in a very important respect: The reason why our earthly journey is so important is because that is the appointed state in which we become who we will be. Hell is the place where we will be who we have become.

I understand that humans are fallible and make mistakes so I can see how some people would temporarily go against God. I think that it makes sense that rebels can change their mind because humans change their mind all the time. If someone is going to be continuously punished, it seems they would have the desire to figure out how to decrease that pain.

And yet… look around you. Do you see any evidence that people are really like that? I don’t. I see a lot of people who stubbornly cling to their lying evil ways, who mock God, who figuratively speaking spit in God’s face, and ignore the notion that they may be punished for this. In any case, hell is simply not a place for conversions, it’s a place for justice. We simply accept as a fact that the damned have no inclination for conversion, and never will - just as we can often observe here on earth!

I agree that human errors against God has nothing to do with God not being loving, but I don’t see how suffering with no chance of it ending is loving.

It may not be loving per se, but it is a direct consequence of love’s having been defiled.

The point of annihilation would be a chance to end suffering. It seems like it would be an end to the tragedy of the soul in hell.

Yes, it does seem that way. But that does not imply that it is just or desirable. You might as well say we could take Joseph Mengele, give him a spanking, then snuff him out - tragedy fini. But the question is: who are you to say that you understand justice better than God (as we understand Him), that the tragedy of the soul in hell is resolved by ending its suffering? Not all suffering is tragic. Not all pity is praiseworthy or appropriate.

I quoted New Advent earlier which said “the damned never experience even the least real pleasure” - so how could one be eager for endless pain?

How can we be eager for endless pain? Look around you - we are perverse creatures! Almost all of us cling to things in this life that cause us pain. Hell is the definitive continuation of that - except that only morally just suffering occurs in hell.

 

[johnnyprc]

The “Problem of Hell” is simple. If you believe Hell the way Catholic’s teach it, then you have to believe that ancient Greeks had their teaching on Hades (Tartarus) mostly correct. Hell is never used in the bible, but Hades and other references are. Belief in the underworld that involves punishment is based in Greek mythology, not biblical truth.

Since Jews did not believe in Hell the way Catholics do, then I suppose they are suggesting the Greeks had a closer viewpoint of the afterlife than God’s chosen people. Catholics need to wake up to all the pagan origins of their beliefs the Church has feed them over the years. The list is long, and the lies great.

 

[Betterave]

johnnyprc:
"The “Problem of Hell” is simple. If you believe Hell the way Catholic’s teach it, then you have to believe that ancient Greeks had their teaching on Hades (Tartarus) mostly correct. - mostly? - hardly!] Hell is never used in the bible, but Hades and other references are. [patently false] Belief in the underworld that involves punishment is based in Greek mythology, not biblical truth. [patently false]

“Since Jews did not believe in Hell the way Catholics do, then I suppose they [who is “they”?] are suggesting the Greeks had a closer viewpoint of the afterlife than God’s chosen people. Catholics need to wake up to all the pagan origins of their beliefs the Church has feed them over the years. [why is that?] The list is long, and the lies great. [let’s all hope the ‘awakening’ happens real soon then ]”

johnny, just to remind you: this is a philosophy forum, not a make-a-bunch-of-wild-assertions forum.