Keith Russell

Greetings:

There has actually been a great deal of discussion on this subject in the Christian Apologetics community.

Are we 'dead' until Armageddon, when the dead will rise from the grave to be judged?

Or, are we immediately sent to Heaven or Hell (or Purgatory) upon our deaths?

The Christians don't even agree.

So much for Biblical 'absolutes'...

Keith.

Keith Russell

Greetings:

A while ago, on the Bible Answer Man, Hank explained that being in the presence of God will be so grand, so wonderful, that we won't know any sorrow--even if our atheistic loved ones are somewhere burning in hell.

(ounds a lot like the people in Heaven are in serious need of some serious cult 'de-programming'.)

Keith.

Philip Osborne

I assume it has something to do with God's perfect justice; by some metaphysical arrangement, a human who does evil creates a metaphysical state of injustice, and this injustice is not corrected until this human is punished sometime after she dies. Is this adequate?

Unfortunately, I will not be able to post anywhere near as often as I used to, as you could probably tell. But yes, your statement of it above seems pretty much how it works. The idea, I suppose, is that if there is a state of affairs which makes the proposition, "There is injustice" or "An evil act has gone unpunished" true, something must be altered so as to undo this state of affairs. We would think it wrong, for instance, if a horrible dictator/mass murderer/rapist/thief/drunk driver/every bad thing possible for a human being to be were allowed to live life without ever receiving punishment.

Sincerely,

Philip

[ September 10, 2002: Message edited by: Philip Osborne ]</p>

Thomas Metcalf

Originally posted by Philip Osborne:

"Unfortunately, I will not be able to post anywhere near as often as I used to, as you could probably tell. But yes, your statement of it above seems pretty much how it works. The idea, I suppose, is that if there is a state of affairs which makes the proposition, 'There is injustice' or 'An evil act has gone unpunished' true, something must be altered so as to undo this state of affairs. We would think it wrong, for instance, if a horrible dictator/mass murderer/rapist/thief/drunk driver/every bad thing possible for a human being to be were allowed to live life without ever receiving punishment."

So, according to Christian morality, punishment for the sake of punishment alone is morally permissible? Also, in your version of Christianity, does everyone receive the same posthumous punishment, or do greater sinners receive greater punishment?

Thanks for your time.

Philip Osborne

So, according to Christian morality, punishment for the sake of punishment alone is morally permissible? Also, in your version of Christianity, does everyone receive the same posthumous punishment, or do greater sinners receive greater punishment?

Actually, it is more proper to say that punishment for the sake of justice is permissible under Christianity. Punishment for the sake of punishment is a misleading phrase, because it seems to imply that punishment is an end in itself, whereas it is actually a means with which to bring about justice.

As far as whether or not greater sinners receive greater punishment, I don't think the Bible says anything about whether or not if you kill two people you will be in the 2nd Circle of Hell, or if you kill three, you will be in the 3rd. Presumably, this is so, since it seems that murderers require greater punishment than cookie thieves. However, I'm not sure.

Sincerely,

Philip

Thomas Metcalf

Originally posted by Philip Osborne:

"Actually, it is more proper to say that punishment for the sake of justice is permissible under Christianity. Punishment for the sake of punishment is a misleading phrase, because it seems to imply that punishment is an end in itself, whereas it is actually a means with which to bring about justice."

I agree; my verbalization was unfair. So it would be safe to say that it is logically impossible for God to cause justice to obtain without punishing people in hell?

"As far as whether or not greater sinners receive greater punishment, I don't think the Bible says anything about whether or not if you kill two people you will be in the 2nd Circle of Hell, or if you kill three, you will be in the 3rd. Presumably, this is so, since it seems that murderers require greater punishment than cookie thieves. However, I'm not sure."

Is punishment in hell infinitely protracted, temporally?

Philip Osborne

I agree; my verbalization was unfair. So it would be safe to say that it is logically impossible for God to cause justice to obtain without punishing people in hell?

When God punishes a person A, He is correcting an unjust state of affairs "A goes unpunished." So obviously, the only way for God to correct this is by punishing A.

Again, I do not claim to have extensive theological knowledge. The question of whether or not people spend an eternity in hell is still subject to debate, and my knowledge is too limited to contribute anything to that debate.

Sincerely,

Philip

Thomas Metcalf

Originally posted by Philip Osborne:
"When God punishes a person A, He is correcting an unjust state of affairs 'A goes unpunished.' So obviously, the only way for God to correct this is by punishing A."

And it is just an objective moral fact that one should prevent unjust states of affairs, or that states of affairs in which evildoers go unpunished are unjust?

Philip Osborne

And it is just an objective moral fact that one should prevent unjust states of affairs, or that states of affairs in which evildoers go unpunished are unjust?

I don't see these two as being opposed. In fact, they would have to both be true in order for my proposal to work.

Sincerely,

Philip

Thomas Metcalf

Originally posted by Philip Osborne:

"I don't see these two as being opposed. In fact, they would have to both be true in order for my proposal to work."

I agree that both are required for your position. I guess I would say my intuitions do not agree with the first, that one always ought to prevent unjust states of affairs. I'm thinking of mercy and forgiveness.

If these objective moral truths exist, we as humans seem to have limited epistemic access to them. Any particular action by God might be seen as fulfilling the requirements of objective morality; for every action God performs, we can say "Maybe it is morally incorrect to refrain from performing that action." Maybe it is morally incorrect not to punish someone infinitely, eternally, for any wrongdoing; maybe it is morally incorrect to reward faith-based believers and punish reason-based believers; maybe it is morally incorrect not to show mercy to everyone. I guess this just bothers me because it implies so much uncertainty here.