The Problem of Hell

I am highly interested in this debate. I also am excited, as this should be an entertaining one. The traditional view of Hell is believed based upon explicit teachings that Hell is an eternal place of torment. [1][2][3]Hell as a place of eternal torment was a unanimous view of the Early Church Fathers. Additionally, the traditional view of the afterlife includes three places. - Heaven for the people devoted unto holiness. - Abraham’s Bosom/Purgatory for those who are not evil or holy. (Abraham’s Bosom is the Orthodox/Protestant term and Purgatory is the Catholic/Anglican term)\- Hell for those who reject God’s reconciliation and choose evil. Christ’s atonement brought a way of reconciliation to those who choose to accept that process. Those who embrace it fully go straight to Heaven. Those who do not directly reject God but do not live a life of full repentance go to the “middle place”\Those who reject this process take the punishment upon themselves. [ibid]My Positive argument The Justice Argument (also rebuttal to the proportionality argument):A) Indeed the crime fits the punishment. Contrary to my opponent’s proposal - eternal punishment is affirmed as proportionate to the crime. Though I agree with my opponent’s statement that a finite crime should not receive infinite punishment… I do not believe that crimes that get you “into hell” are finite. They may be temporal (as in a moment in time) but their implications are eternal. For example: Murder has a permanent consequence for all involved. If the consequence is permanent, what in my opponent’s opinion should release you? Raping a women or a virgin and mentally scarring her from being ever able to have a normal life has eternal or everlasting consequences. Certain sins cannot be mended or undone and the punishment fits the crime. Not all sins warrant a trip to Hell. For those who are not morally perfect, they will spend time in place of purification called Abraham’s bosom/purgatory. Rejection of God’s reconciliation process means you accept the eternal consequence of your sins and consequently the result of Hell as it is laid out within the traditional view. B) God’s “sense” of divine justice is well within his omni-benevolence. I do not see any conflict with God’s sense of “punishment – chastisement – torment – retribution” as used by the Biblical authors and God’s described character traits of benevolence. After all, God commands us not to be vengeful but He is a God of vengeance (enactor of retribution)Leviticus 19:18 `You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord. Deuteronomy 32:35 Vengeance is Mine, and recompense; Their foot shall slip in due time;For the day of their calamity is at hand,And the things to come hastenupon them. 'We see also in the New Testament:Romans 12:19 Beloved, do not avenge yourselves, but rather give place to wrath; for it iswritten, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. Hebrews 10:30 For we know Him who said, "Vengeance is Mine, I will repay," says the Lord. And again, "The Lord will judge His people. "The traditional view of Christianity clearly asserts that God is a God of Vengeance and retribution. He is the perfect moral agent capable of enacting vengeance without the sin that would encumber us. C) Retribution-torment-torture. God is not some sadistic Being tormenting people like a sadist. A Person’s eternal sins beget an eternal punishment. God’s torment is morally apt as a perfect moral agent. D) Concerning Hell and reformation. - As we have seen that the place of reformation is Abraham’s Bosom/ Purgatory. You can reform in this life and earn greater rewards… or in Abraham’s Bosom and earn no rewards. - Hell is for people who are beyond reformation. God decides this not us. We see examples of God’s overruling decision for people in the Flood Narrative, Numbers 12, Moses’ never being allowed to see the Promised Land etc. We have a limited amount of time to repent and reconcile with God. - An additional concept would be a person who has a permanent black mark on their record excluding them from a future service or privilege. Gun laws and military advancement being some examples. Take for the easy example, Hitler. How could we possibly know how such a devoutly evil person would handle his “reform” program? If we let him out into heaven, how can we know how he would respond to eternal life and an eternal existence? I believe my opponent would agree that we simply are not in a good place to determine if Hell bound people can actually reform. E) People being eternally sent to Hell have a reformative quality for those in Heaven. - If we are speculating about this; why is it not equally plausible that the lost souls in Hell, who deserve to be there, are not serving as examples to those in Heaven to not fall away from their positive Moral framework? - This is the old argument that the extreme but justified punishment of lopping off criminals hands (for a variety of crimes) goes a very very long way in deterring people on the “proverbial fence”. Concerning the contrast of Eternal BlissI am at this moment completely unconcerned that evil murderers are going through unimaginable suffering in prison right now the world over. They are being beaten, sodomized and even exploited for profit. They are thirsty and suffering hunger. I on the other hand, would be incredibly concerned if these people were running rampant the world over. I would love that these people would repent but I feel far more comforted that Justice is being served. I do indeed prefer a Just God and I believe that my bliss would be enhanced knowing that God will right all wrongs through a perfect system of Justice. Eternal crime merits eternal punishment. True Repentance merits true forgiveness. I am myself a chaplain and I have ministered in prisons and to a multitude of ex-cons. I love when I can uncover a diamond in the evil so to speak. However, I realize that the choices would be the same for many of these people should they be released. Few actually repent. Concerning the reconciliation objection: I believe this is an objection based on a non-traditional interpretation. Even though I can be at peace with everyone that does not mean everyone will be at peace with me. Romans 12:18“If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. ”The traditional interpretation is that if you reject this reconciliation process through Jesus Christ you are then tossed into Hell. The interpretation is not that “God will force reconciliation on everyone. ”This objection seems to be a false dilemma from my opponent. His argument is as follows:1) God reconciles all things2) Hell is not reconciliation3) Thus Hell cannot be the traditional place of eternal torment. The actual situation and traditional interpretation is a third option.1) God offers reconciliation to all things through Christ’s actions.2) Hell is a place for those unwilling to reconcile with God.3) Hell is a place of deserved eternal retribution for those unwilling to reconcile with God. [1] . http://www.newadvent.org... [2] the Fathers, from the very earliest times, are unanimous in teaching that the wicked will be punished after death. And in proof of their doctrine they appeal both to Scripture and to reason (cf. Ignatius, "Ad Eph. ", v, 16; "Martyrium s. Polycarpi", ii, n, 3; xi, n.2; Justin, "Apol. ", II, n. 8 in P. G. , VI, 458; Athenagoras, "De resurr. mort. ", c. xix, in P. G. , VI, 1011; Irenaeus, Against Heresies V.27.2; Tertullian, "Adv. Marc. ", I, c. xxvi, in P. L. , IV, 277)[3] . http://www.newadvent.org...[4] Ephesians 2:14-17