Hell And Justice

[TheHumeanCondition]

A general note to everyone who's brought this up: I appreciate that there are few religious texts which contain explicit and uncontroversial reference to an eternal punishment after death. However, it is a reasonably common belief among the religious that hell is both real and eternal. Please do not try explaining that, in X religion, there is no belief in eternal punishment. Those religions aren't the focus of my argument.

Nice paradox.

My understanding of Early Christianity (not to be confused with post-Nicene Christianity which began in 325 AD only) is that Hell is reserved for those who commit infinity evil, whereas Heaven is reserved for those with good works as explained in Matthew Chapter 25.

There is little explanation given by Jesus or anybody else what happens to those souls who are neither evil nor good -- who are lukewarm -- who have done no good works nor any evil works either.

But not just those who are neither good or bad, right? It's also silent about those who've done evil works, but not committed any infinite evils (from your claims, I mean).

I get the impression that the premise you take issue with is the third one ("Humans can only commit finite crimes"). Certainly you've been claiming that infinite crimes exist. I'll argue on behalf of that premise later--for now, would you agree that if that premise were true, God could not justly send people to Hell?

My technical answer to you is that you have loaded the question therefore your original statement is obviously a fallacy.

I would give you a citation for classic fallacies but the website won't let me do this yet.

Can you please quote the loaded question you think I'm asking? I know my classic fallacies quite well, but I didn't feel like I made any unfair assumptions when I asked my questions.

Imagine Adolf or Stalin, or anyone else who has murdered millions of people. You cannot seriously expect them to be granted forgiveness.

If murder is an infinite crime, it wouldn't increase in severity when repeated a finite amount of times. I have a friend who killed someone many years ago. Certainly, I think it was a bad thing he did, and I think that he deserved to be punished. And he was--he went to prison for many years and is now on parole, as he will be for the rest of his life. However, I wouldn't consider him as deserving infinite punishment, and I wouldn't consider him as bad as Adolf or Stalin. However, I would consider him as having committed a worse crime than someone who killed a horse (which, if you accord horses the same standing as humans, is presumably tantamount to murder). But you think that all of these crimes are infinite, no? And hence deserving of infinite punishment? I think the levels of severity they demonstrate are vastly different.

[OntheHorizon]

This is a paradox only with the given values of hell and justice, but they are commonly held beliefs.

Justice requires that a punishment is proportional to the crime.
Nothing infinite is proportional to anything infinite.
Humans can only commit finite crimes.
Hence, humans can only justly receive finite punishments.
Hell is an infinite punishment.
Hence, humans cannot justly be sent to Hell.

However, theists frequently hold both the view that God sends people to Hell and the view that God is just. Is there any way to reconcile those views with my logical construction? Or, if not, which conclusion do you see as invalid or axiom untrue?

People who think it's ok to burn someone alive are either ignorant, insane or evil. I think religious people just don't ponder the matter long enough to fully conceptualize it. The last time I had Christians knocking on my door to witness to me I asked them if they would help god burn me alive if he asked them too or if they would take me into my kitchen and burn me in my stove and they couldn't answer the question. It's just a pipedream they haven't really thought about enough. I do think your problem is effective in showing that it's not appropriate to burn someone alive forever but you'd have to be insane to think that's ok anyway. I think there are topics that are brains are not familiar with engaging and that our brains are blocked to in a kind of way.

We feel like it's wrong to burn people in hell, but in WW2 we did burn enemies alive with flame throwers to get them out of their holes in the ground. Religious people have burned sinners alive before. I think there are subjects (for some people) that block off our moral senses and I think GOD is one of those things. God and War.

[Skydude]

I like to think hell would exists to allow people to experience the severity of their sins and understand the consequences of their actions from the veiwpoints of those that have been affected. Being made to relive these torments until they fully understand the nature of what they have done to others and themselves. after this they may be reborn somehow for their soul to reinvent itself as A new being.