Perun: Interesting article concerning Hell and how God relates to it

http://www.philthompson.net/pages/library/riveroffire.html

The River of Fire
By Dr. Alexander Kalomiros © 1980 St. Nectarios Press


A reply to the questions: Is God really good? Did God create hell?

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.

There is no doubt that we are living in the age of apostasy predicted for the last days. In practice, most people are atheists, although many of them theoretically still believe. Indifference and the spirit of this world prevail everywhere.

What is the reason for this state?

The reason is the cooling of love. Love for God no more burns in human hearts, and in consequence, love between us is dead, too.

What is the cause of this waning of men’s love for God? The answer, certainly, is sin. Sin is the dark cloud which does not permit God’s light to reach our eyes.

But sin always did exist. So how did we arrive at the point of not simply ignoring God, but of actually hating Him? Man’s attitude toward God today is not really ignorance, or really indifference. If you examine men carefully you will notice that their ignorance or indifference is tainted by a deep hate. But nobody hates anything that does not exist.

I have the suspicion that men today believe in God more than at any other time in human history. Men know the gospel, the teaching of the Church, and God’s creation better than at any other time. They have a profound consciousness of His existence. Their atheism is not a real disbelief. It is rather an aversion toward somebody we know very well but whom we hate with all our heart, exactly as the demons do.

We hate God, that is why we ignore Him, overlooking Him as if we did not see Him, and pretending to be atheists. In reality we consider Him our enemy par excellence. Our negation is our vengeance, our atheism is our revenge.

But why do men hate God? They hate Him not only because their deeds are dark while God is light, but also because they consider Him as a menace, as an imminent and eternal danger, as an adversary in court, as an opponent at law, as a public prosecutor and an eternal persecutor. To them, God is no more the almighty physician who came to save them from illness and death, but rather a cruel judge and a vengeful inquisitor.

You see, the devil managed to make men believe that God does not really love us, that He really only loves Himself, and that He accepts us only if we behave as He wants us to behave; that He hates us if we do not behave as He ordered us to behave, and is offended by our insubordination to such a degree that we must pay for it by eternal tortures, created by Him for that purpose.

Who can love a torturer? Even those who try hard to save themselves from the wrath of God cannot really love Him. They love only themselves, trying to escape God’s vengeance and to achieve eternal bliss by managing to please this fearsome and extremely dangerous Creator.

Do you perceive the devil’s slander of our all-loving, all-kind, and absolutely good God? That is why in Greek the devil was given the name of diabolos, "the slanderer."

II

But what was the instrument of the devil’s slandering of God? What means did he use in order to convince humanity, in order to pervert human thought?

He used "theology." He first introduced a slight alteration in theology which, once it was accepted, he managed to increase more and more to the degree that Christianity became completely unrecognizable. This is what we call "Western theology."

Did you ever try to pinpoint what is the principal characteristic of Western theology? Well, its principal characteristic is that it considers God as the real cause of all evil.

What is evil? Is it not the estrangement from God Who is Life?1 Is it not death? What does Western theology teach about death? All Roman Catholics and most Protestants consider death as a punishment from God. God considered all men guilty of Adam’s sin and punished them by death, that is by cutting them away from Himself; depriving them of His live-giving energy, and so killing them spiritually at first and later bodily, by some sort of spiritual starvation. Augustine interprets the passage in Genesis "If you eat of the fruit of this tree, you will die the death" as "If you eat of the fruit of this tree, I will kill you."

Some Protestants consider death not as a punishment but as something natural. But is not God the creator of all natural things? So in both cases, God—for them—is the real cause of death.

And this is true not only for the death of the body. It is equally true for the death of the soul. Do not Western theologians consider hell, the eternal spiritual death of man, as a punishment from God? And do they not consider the devil as a minister of God for the eternal punishment of men in hell?

The "God" of the West is an offended and angry God, full of wrath for the disobedience of men, who desires in His destructive passion to torment all humanity unto eternity for their sins, unless He receives an infinite satisfaction for His offended pride.

What is the Western dogma of salvation? Did not God kill God in order to satisfy His pride, which the Westerners euphemistically call justice? And is it not by this infinite satisfaction that He deigns to accept the salvation of some of us?

What is salvation for Western theology? Is it not salvation from the wrath of God?2

Do you see, then, that Western theology teaches that our real danger and our real enemy is our Creator and God? Salvation, for Westerners, is to be saved from the hands of God!

How can one love such a God? How can we have faith in someone we detest? Faith in its deeper essence is a product of love, therefore, it would be our desire that one who threatens us not even exist, especially when this threat is eternal.

Even if there exists a means of escaping the eternal wrath of this omnipotent but wicked Being (the death of His Son in our stead), it would be much better if this Being did not exist. This was the most logical conclusion of the mind and of the heart of the Western peoples, because even eternal Paradise would be abhorrent with such a cruel God. Thus was atheism born, and this is why the West was its birthplace. Atheism was unknown in Eastern Christianity until Western theology was introduced there, too. Atheism is the consequence of Western theology.3 Atheism is the denial, the negation of an evil God. Men became atheists in order to be saved from God, hiding their head and closing their eyes like an ostrich. Atheism, my brothers, is the negation of the Roman Catholic and Protestant God. Atheism is not our real enemy. The real enemy is that falsified and distorted "Christianity."

III

Westerners speak frequently of the "Good God" (e.g. in France ‘le bon dieu’ is almost always used when speaking of God). Western Europe and America, however, were never convinced that such a Good God existed. On the contrary, they were calling God good in the way Greeks called the curse and malediction of smallpox, eulogia that is, a blessing, a benediction, in order to exorcise it and charm it away. For the same reason, the Black Sea was called Euxeinos Pontos — the hospitable sea — although it was, in fact, a dreadful and treacherous sea. Deep inside the Western soul, God was felt to be the wicked Judge, Who never forgot even the smallest offense done to Him in our transgressions of His laws.

This juridical conception of God, this completely distorted interpretation of God’s justice, was nothing else than the projection of human passions on theology. It was a return to the pagan process of humanizing God and deifying man. Men are vexed and angered when not taken seriously and consider it a humiliation which only vengeance can remove, whether it is by crime or by duel. This was the worldly, passionate conception of justice prevailing in the minds of a so-called "Christian" society.

Western Christians thought about God’s justice in the same way also; God, the infinite Being, was infinitely insulted by Adam’s disobedience. He decided that the guilt of Adam’s disobedience descended equally to all His children, and that all were to be sentenced to death for Adam’s sin, which they did not commit. God’s justice for Westerners operated like a vendetta. Not only the man who insulted you, but also all his family must die. And what was tragic for men, to the point of hopelessness, was that no man, nor even all humanity, could appease God’s insulted dignity, even if all men in history were to be sacrificed. God’s dignity could be saved only if He could punish someone of the same dignity as He. So in order to save both God’s dignity and mankind, there was no other solution than the incarnation of His Son, so that a man of godly dignity could be sacrificed to save God’s honor.

IV

This paganistic conception of God’s justice which demands infinite sacrifices in order to be appeased clearly makes God our real enemy and the cause of all our misfortunes. Moreover, it is a justice which is not at all just since it punishes and demands satisfaction from persons which were not at all responsible for the sin of their forefathers.4 In other words, what Westerners call justice ought rather to be called resentment and vengeance of the worst kind. Even Christ’s love and sacrifice loses its significance and logic in this schizoid notion of a God who kills God in order to satisfy the so-called justice of God.

Does this conception of justice have anything to do with the justice that God revealed to us? Does the phrase "justice of God" have this meaning in the Old and New Testaments?

Perhaps the beginning of the mistaken interpretation of the word justice in the Holy Scriptures was its translation by the Greek word dikaiosyne. Not that it is a mistaken translation, but because this word, being a word of the pagan, humanistic, Greek civilization, was charged with human notions which could easily lead to misunderstandings.

First of all, the word dikaiosyne brings to mind an equal distribution. This is why it is represented by a balance. The good are rewarded and the bad are punished by human society in a fair way. This is human justice, the one which takes place in court.

Is this the meaning of God’s justice, however?

The word dikaiosyne, "justice," is a translation of the Hebraic word tsedakav. This word means "the divine energy which accomplishes man’s salvation." It is parallel and almost synonymous to the other Hebraic word, hese’d which means "mercy," "compassion," "love," and to the word, eméth which means "fidelity," "truth." This, as you see, gives a completely other dimension to what we usually conceive as justice.5 This is how the Church understood God’s justice. This is what the Fathers of the Church taught of it. "How can you call God just," writes Saint Isaac the Syrian, "when you read the passage on the wage given to the workers? ‘Friend, I do thee no wrong; I will give unto this last even as unto thee who worked for me from the first hour. Is thine eye evil, because I am good?’" "How can a man call God just," continues Saint Isaac, "when he comes across the passage on the prodigal son, who wasted his wealth in riotous living, and yet only for the contrition which he showed, the father ran and fell upon his neck, and gave him authority over all his wealth? None other but His very Son said these things concerning Him lest we doubt it, and thus He bare witness concerning Him. Where, then, is God’s justice, for whilst we were sinners, Christ died for us!"6

So we see that God is not just, with the human meaning of this word, but we see that His justice means His goodness and love, which are given in an unjust manner, that is, God always gives without taking anything in return, and He gives to persons like us who are not worthy of receiving. That is why Saint Isaac teaches us "Do not call God just, for His justice is not manifest in the things concerning you. And if David calls Him just and upright, His Son revealed to us that He is good and kind. ‘He is good,’ He says, ‘to the evil and impious.’"7

God is good, loving, and kind toward those who disregard, disobey, and ignore Him.8 He never returns evil for evil, He never takes vengeance.9 His punishments are loving means of correction, as long as anything can be corrected and healed in this life.l0 They never extend to eternity. He created everything good..ll The wild beasts recognize as their master the Christian who through humility has gained the likeness of God. They draw near to him, not with fear, but with joy, in grateful and loving submission; they wag their heads and lick his hands and serve him with gratitude. The irrational beasts know that their Master and God is not evil and wicked and vengeful, but rather full of love. (See also St. Isaac of Syria, Ozomena Asketika [Athens, 1871], pp. 95-96.) He protected and saved us when we fell. The eternally evil has nothing to do with God. It comes rather from the will of His free, logical creatures, and this will He respects.l2

Death was not inflicted upon us by God.l3 We fell into it by our revolt. God is Life and Life is God. We revolted against God, we closed our gates to His life-giving grace.l4 "For as much as he departed from life," wrote Saint Basil, "by so much did he draw nearer to death. For God is Life, deprivation of life is death."15 "God did not create death," continues Saint Basil, "but we brought it upon ourselves." "Not at all, however, did He hinder the dissolution… so that He would not make the infirmity immortal in us."l6 As Saint Irenaeus puts it: "Separation from God is death, separation from light is darkness… and it is not the light which brings upon them the punishment of blindness."l7

"Death," says Saint Maximus the Confessor, "is principally the separation from God, from which followed necessarily the death of the body. Life is principally He who said, ‘I am the Life.’"18

And why did death come upon the whole of humanity? Why did those who did not sin with Adam die as did Adam? Here is the reply of Saint Anastasius the Sinaite: "We became the inheritors of the curse in Adam. We were not punished as if we had disobeyed that divine commandment along with Adam; but because Adam became mortal, he transmitted sin to his posterity. We became mortal since we were born from a mortal."l9

And Saint Gregory Palamas makes this point: "[God] did not say to Adam: return to whence thou wast taken; but He said to him: Earth thou art and unto the earth thou shalt return.... He did not say: ‘in whatsoever day ye shall eat of it, die!’ but, ‘in whatsoever day ye shall eat of it, ye shall surely die.’ Nor did He afterwards say: ‘return now unto the earth,’ but He said, ‘thou shalt return,’ in this manner forewarning, justly permitting and not obstructing what shall come to pass."20 We see that death did not come at the behest of God but as a consequence of Adam’s severing his relations with the source of Life, by his disobedience; and God in His kindness did only warn him of it.

"The tree of knowledge itself," says Theophilus of Antioch, "was good, and its fruit was good. For it was not the tree, as some think, that had death in it, but the disobedience which had death in it; for there was nothing else in the fruit but knowledge alone, and knowledge is good when one uses it properly."2l The Fathers teach us that the prohibition to taste the tree of knowledge was not absolute but temporary. Adam was a spiritual infant. Not all foods are good for infants. Some foods may even kill them although adults would find them wholesome. The tree of knowledge was planted by God for man. It was good and and nourishing. But it was solid food, while Adam was able to digest only milk.

V

So in the language of the Holy Scriptures, "just" means good and loving. We speak of the just men of the Old Testament. That does not mean that they were good judges but that they were kind and God-loving people. When we say that God is just, we do not mean that He is a good judge Who knows how to punish men equitably according to the gravity of their crimes, but on the contrary, we mean that He is kind and loving, forgiving all transgressions and disobediences, and that He wants to save us by all means, and never requites evil for evil.22 In the first volume of the Philokalia there is a magnificent text of Saint Anthony which I must read to you here:

God is good, dispassionate, and immutable. Now someone who thinks it reasonable and true to affirm that God does not change, may well ask how, in that case, it is possible to speak of God as rejoicing over those who are good and showing mercy to those who honor Him, and as turning away from the wicked and being angry with sinners. To this it must be answered that God neither rejoices nor grows angry, for to rejoice and to be offended are passions; nor is He won over by the gifts of those who honor Him, for that would mean He is swayed by pleasure. It is not right that the Divinity feel pleasure or displeasure from human conditions.

He is good, and He only bestows blessings and never does harm, remaining always the same. We men, on the other hand, if we remain good through resembling God, are united to Him, but if we become evil through not resembling God, we are separated from Him. By living in holiness we cleave to God; but by becoming wicked we make Him our enemy. It is not that He grows angry with us in an arbitrary way, but it is our own sins that prevent God from shining within us and expose us to demons who torture us. And if through prayer and acts of compassion we gain release from our sins, this does not mean that we have won God over and made Him to change, but that through our actions and our turning to the Divinity, we have cured our wickedness and so once more have enjoyment of God’s goodness. Thus to say that God turns away from the wicked is like saying that the sun hides itself from the blind.23 [Chap. 150]

VI

You see now, I hope, how God was slandered by Western theology. Augustine, Anselm, Thomas Aquinas and all their pupils contributed to this "theological" calumny. And they are the foundations of Western theology, whether Papist or Protestant. Certainly these theologians do not say expressly and clearly that God is a wicked and passionate being. They rather consider God as being chained by a superior force, by a gloomy and implacable Necessity like the one which governed the pagan gods. This Necessity obliges Him to return evil for evil and does not permit Him to pardon and to forget the evil done against His will, unless an infinite satisfaction is offered to Him.

We open here the great question of pagan, Greek influence on Christianity.

The pagan mentality was in the foundation of all heresies. It was very strong in the East, because the East was the crossroad of all philosophical and religious currents. But as we read in the New Testament, "where sin abounded, grace did much more abound." So when heresies flourished, Orthodoxy flourished also, and although it was persecuted by the mighty of this world, it always survived victorious. In the West, on the contrary, the pagan Greek mentality entered in unobtrusively, without taking the aspect of heresy. It entered in through the multitude of Latin texts dictated by Augustine, Bishop of Hippo. Saint John Cassian who was living then in the West understood the poison that was in Augustine’s teachings, and fought against it. But the fact that Augustine’s books were written in Latin and the fact that they were extremely lengthy did not permit their study by the other Fathers of the Church, and so they were never condemned as Origen’s works were condemned in the East. This fact permitted them to exercise a strong influence later in Western thought and theology. In the West, little by little knowledge of the Greek language vanished, and Augustine’s texts were the only books available dating from ancient times in a language understood there. So the West received as Christian a teaching which was in many of its aspects pagan. Caesaro-papist developments in Rome did not permit any healthy reaction to this state of affairs, and so the West was drowned in the humanistic, pagan thought which prevails to this day.24

So we have the East on the one side which, speaking and writing Greek, remained essentially the New Israel with Israelitic thought and sacred tradition, and the West on the other side which having forgotten the Greek language and having been cut off from the Eastern state, inherited pagan Greek thought and its mentality, and formed with it an adulterated Christian teaching.

In reality, the opposition between Orthodoxy and Western Christianity is nothing else but the perpetuation of the opposition between Israel and Hellas.

We must never forget that the Fathers of the Church considered themselves to be the true spiritual children of Abraham, that the Church considered itself to be the New Israel, and that the Orthodox peoples, whether Greek, Russian, Bulgarian, Serbian, Romanian, etc., were conscious of being like Nathaniel, true Israelites, the People of God. And while this was the real consciousness of Eastern Christianity, the West became more and more a child of pagan, humanistic Greece and Rome.

VII

What were the principal characteristics of this difference of thought between Israel and paganism? I call your attention to this very important matter. Israel believes in God. Paganism believes in creation. That is to say, in paganism creation is deified. For the pagans, God and creation are one and the same thing. God is impersonal, personified in a multitude of gods.

Israel (and when we speak of Israel we mean the true Israel, the spiritual sons of Abraham, those who have the faith given by God to His chosen people, not those who have abandoned this faith. The real sons of Abraham are the Church of Christ, and not those carnal descendants, the Jewish race), Israel knows that God and creation are two radically different kinds of existence. God is self-existent, personal, eternal, immortal, Life and the Source of life, Existence and the Source of existence; God is the only real Existence: O Wn the Existing, the Only Existing; this is the meaning of the article "‘O".25

Creation, on the contrary, has no self-existence. It is totally dependent on the will of God. It exists only so long as God wants it to exist. It is not eternal. It had no existence. It was null, it was completely nothing. It was created out of nothingness.26 By itself it has no force of existence; it is kept in existence by God’s Energy. If this loving Energy of God ever stops, creation and all created beings, intellectual or non-intellectual, rational or irrational will vanish into non-existence. We know that God’s love for His creation is eternal. We know from Him that He will never let us fall into non-existence, from which He brought us into being. This is our hope and God is true in His promises. We, created beings, angels, and men, will live in eternity, not because we have in us the power of eternity, but because this is the will of God Who loves us. By ourselves we are nothing. We have not the least energy of life and of existence in our nature; that which we have comes entirely from God; nothing is ours. We are dirt of the earth, and when we forgot it, God in His mercy permitted that we return to what we are, in order that we remain humble and have exact knowledge of our nothingness.27 "God," says Saint John Damascene elsewhere, "can do all that He wills, even though He does not will all things that He can do—for He can destroy creation, but He does not will to do so." (Ibid. 1, 14)28

In the Great Euchologion, a fundamental liturgical book of the Church, we read:

"O God, the great and most high, Thou Who alone hast immortality"
[7th prayer of Vespers, p. 15]
"Thou Who alone art life-giving by nature… O only immortal"
[Ode 5, Funeral Canon for Laymen, p. 410]
"Thou art the only immortal"
[P. 410]
"The only One Who is immortal because of His godly nature"
[Ode 1, Funeral Canon for Laymen, p. 471]


This is the faith of Israel.

What is the teaching of paganism? Paganism is the consequence of the loss of contact with God. The multitude of the sins of humanity made men incapable of receiving the divine light and of having any union with the Living God. The consequence was to consider as something divine the creation which they saw before them every day.

Paganism considers creation as being something self-existent and immortal, something that always existed and will always exist. In paganism the gods are part of creation. They did not create it from nothingness, they only formed the existing matter. Matter can take different forms. Forms come into existence and vanish, but matter itself is eternal. Angels, demons, and the souls of men are the real gods. Eternal by their nature, as is matter itself, they are, however, higher than matter. They might take different material forms in a sequence of material existences but they remain essentially spiritual.

So in paganism we see two fundamental characteristics: (l) An attributing of the characteristics of godhood to the whole of creation, that is eternity, immortality, self-existence. (2) A distinction between the spiritual and the material and an antagonism between the two as between something higher and something lower.

Paganism and humanism are one and the same thing. In paganism, man is god because he is eternal by nature. This is why paganism is always haughty. It is narcissism. It is self adoration. In Greece, the gods had human characteristics. Greek religion was the pagan adoration of man. The soul of man was considered his real being, and was immortal by nature .

So we see that in paganism the devil succeeded in creating a universal belief that men were gods and so did not need God. This is why pride was so high in Greece and why humility was inconceivable. In his work The Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle writes the following words: "Not to resent offenses is the mark of a base and slavish man." The man who is convinced by the devil to believe in the error that his soul is eternal by nature, can never be humble and can never really believe in God, because he does not need God, being God himself, as his error makes him believe.

This is why, from the very first, the Fathers of the Church, understanding the danger of this stupid error, warned the Christians of the fact that, as Saint Irenaeus puts it "The teaching that the human soul is naturally immortal is from the devil" (Proof of the Apostolic Preaching, 111, 20. 1). We find the same warning in Saint Justin (Dialogue with Trypho 6. 1-2), in Theophilus of Antioch (To Autolycus 2. 97), in Tatian (To the Greeks 13), etc.

Saint Justin explains the fundamental atheism which exists in the belief of the natural eternity and immortality of the human soul. He writes: "There are some others who, having supposed that the soul is immortal and immaterial, believe though they have committed evil they will not suffer punishment (for that which is immaterial is also insensible), and that the soul, in consequence of its immorality needs nothing from God" (Dialogue with Trypho 1).

Paganism is ignorance of the true God, an erroneous belief that His creation is divine, really a god. This god, however, who is Nature, is impersonal, a blind force, above all personal gods, and is called Necessity (Ananke). In reality, this Necessity is the projection of human reason, as a mathematical necessity governing the world. It is a projection of rationalism upon nature. This rationalistic Necessity is the true, supreme blind god of the pagans. The pagan gods are parts of the world, and they are immortal because of the immortality of nature which is their essence. In this pagan mentality, man is also god like the others, because for the pagans the real man is only his soul,29 and they believe that man’s soul is immortal in itself, since it is part of the essence of the universe, which is considered immortal in itself and self-existent. So man also is god and a measure of all things.

But the gods are not free. They are governed by Necessity which is impersonal.

VIII

It is this pagan way of thought that was mixed with the Christian teaching by the various heresies. This is what happened in the West, too. They began to distinguish not between God and His creation, but between spirit and matter.30 They began to think of the soul of man as of something eternal in itself, and began to consider the condition of man after death not as asleep in the hands of God, but as the real life of man,3l to which the resurrection of the dead had nothing to add and even the need of the resurrection was doubtful. The feast of the Resurrection of our Lord, which is the culmination of all feasts in Orthodoxy, began to fall into second place, because its need was as incomprehensible to the Western Christians as it was to the Athenians who heard the sermon of the Apostle Paul.

But what is more important for our subject, they began to feel that God was subject to Necessity, to this rationalistic Necessity which was nothing else but human logic. They declared Him incapable of coming into contact with inferior beings like men, because their rationalistic, philosophical conceptions did not permit it, and it was this belief which was the foundation of the hesychast disputes; it had already begun with Augustine who taught that it was not God Who spoke to Moses but an angel instead.

It is in this context of Necessity, which even gods obey, that we must understand the Western juridical conception of God’s justice. It was necessary for God to punish man’s disobedience. It was impossible for Him to pardon; a superior Necessity demanded vengeance. Even if God was in reality good and loving, He was not able to act lovingly. He was obliged to act contrary to His love; the only thing He could do, in order to save humanity, was to punish His Son in the place of men, and by this means was Necessity satisfied.

IX

This is the triumph of Hellenistic thought in Christianity. As a Hellenist, Origen had arrived at the same conclusions. God was a judge by necessity. He was obliged to punish, to avenge, to send people to hell. Hell was God’s creation. It was a punishment demanded by justice. This demand of justice was a necessity. God was obliged to submit to it. He was not permitted to forgive. There was a superior force, a Necessity which did not permit Him to love unconditionally.

However, Origen was also a Christian and he knew that God was full of love. How is it possible to acknowledge a loving God Who keeps people in torment eternally? If God is the cause of hell, by necessity then there must be an end to it, otherwise we cannot concede that God is good and loving. This juridical conception of God as an instrument of a superior, impersonal force or deity named Necessity, leads logically to apokatastasis, "the restoration of all things and the destruction of hell," otherwise we must admit that God is cruel.

The pagan Greek mentality could not comprehend that the cause of hell was not God but His logical creatures. If God was not really free, since He was governed by Necessity, how could His creatures be free? God could not give something which He did not possess Himself. Moreover, the pagan Greek mentality could not conceive of disinterested love. Freedom, however, is the highest gift that God could give to a creature, because freedom makes the logical creatures like God. This was an inconceivable gift for pagan Greeks. They could not imagine a creature which could say "no" to an almighty God. If God was almighty, creatures could not say "no" to Him. So if God gave men His grace, men could not reject it. Otherwise God would not be almighty. If we admit that God is almighty, then His grace must be irresistible. Men cannot escape from it. That means that those men who are deprived of God’s grace are deprived because God did not give His grace to them. So the loss of God’s grace, which is eternal, spiritual death, in other words, hell, is in reality an act totally dependent on God. It is God Who is punishing these people by depriving them of His grace, by not permitting it to shine upon them. So God is the cause of the eternal spiritual death of those who are damned. Damnation is an act of God, an act of God’s justice, an act of necessity or cruelty. As a result, Origen thought that if we are to remain Christians, if we are to continue to believe that God is really good, we must believe that hell is not eternal, but will have an end, in spite of all that is written in the Holy Scripture and of what the Church believes. This is the fatal, perfectly logical conclusion. If God is the cause of hell, hell must have an end, or else God is an evil God.

Origen, and all rationalists who are like him, was not able to understand that the acceptance or the rejection of God’s grace depends entirely on the rational creatures; that God, like the sun, never stops shining on good or wicked alike; that rational creatures are, however, entirely free to accept or reject this grace and love; and that God in His genuine love does not force His creatures to accept Him, but respects absolutely their free decision.32 He does not withdraw His grace and love, but the attitude of the logical creatures toward this unceasing grace and love is the difference between paradise and hell. Those who love God are happy with Him, those who hate Him are extremely miserable by being obliged to live in His presence, and there is no place where one can escape the loving omnipresence of God.

Paradise or hell depends on how we will accept God’s love. Will we return love for love. or will we respond to His love with hate? This is the critical difference. And this difference depends entirely on us, on our freedom, on our innermost free choice, on a perfectly free attitude which is not influenced by external conditions or internal factors of our material and psychological nature, because it is not an external act but an interior attitude coming from the bottom of our heart, conditioning not our sins, but the way we think about our sins, as it is clearly seen in the case of the publican and the Pharisee and in the case of the two robbers crucified with Christ. This freedom, this choice, this inner attitude toward our Creator is the innermost core of our eternal personality, it is the most profound of our characteristics, it is what makes us that which we are, it is our eternal face—bright or dark, loving or hating.

No, my brothers, unhappily for us, paradise or hell does not depend on God. If it depended on God, we would have nothing to fear. We have nothing to fear from Love. But it does not depend on God. It depends entirely upon us, and this is the whole tragedy. God wants us to be in His image, eternally free. He respects us absolutely. This is love. Without respect, we cannot speak of love. We are men because we are free. If we were not free, we would be clever animals, not men. God will never take back this gift of freedom which renders us what we are. This means that we will always be what we want to be, friends or enemies of God, and there is no changing in this our deepest self. In this life, there are profound or superficial changes in our life, in our character, in our beliefs, but all these changes are only the expression in time of our deepest eternal self. This deep eternal self is eternal, with all the meaning of the word. This is why paradise and hell are also eternal. There is no changing in what we really are. Our temporal characteristics and our history in life depend on many superficial things which vanish with death, but our real personality is not superficial and does not depend on changing and vanishing things. It is our real self. It remains with us when we sleep in the grave, and will be our real face in the resurrection. It is eternal.

XI

Saint John of the Ladder says somewhere in his work that "before our fall the demons say to us that God is a friend of man; but after our fall, they say that He is inexorable." This is the cunning lie of the devil: to convince us that any harm in our life has as its cause God’s disposition; that it is God Who will forgive us or Who will punish us. Wishing to throw us into sin and then to make us lose any hope of freeing ourselves from it, they seek to present God as sometimes forgiving all sins, and sometimes as inexorable. Most Christians, even Orthodox Christians, have fallen into this pit. They consider God responsible for our being pardoned or our being punished. This, my brothers, is a terrible falsehood which makes most men lose eternal life, principally because in considering God’s love, they convince themselves that God, in His love, will pardon them. God is always loving, He is always pardoning, He is always a friend of man. However, that which never pardons, that which never is a friend of man, is sin, and we never think of it as we ought to. Sin destroys our soul independently of the love of God, because sin is precisely the road which leads away from God, because sin erects a wall which separates us from God, because sin destroys our spiritual eyes and makes us unable to see God’s light. The demons want to make us always think of our salvation or our eternal spiritual death in juridical terms. They want us to think that either salvation or eternal death is a question of God’s decision. No, my brothers, we must awaken in order not to be lost. Our salvation or our eternal death is not a question of God’s decision, but it is a question of our decision, it is a question of the decision of our free will which God respects absolutely. Let us not fool ourselves with confidence in God’s love. The danger does not come from God; it comes from our own self.

XII

Many will say "Does not Holy Scripture itself often speak about the anger of God? Is it not God Himself who says that He will punish us or that He will pardon us? Is it not written that ‘He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him’ (Heb. 11:6)?33 Does He not say that vengeance is His and that He will requite the wickedness done to us? Is it not written that it is fearful to fall into the hands of the living God?"34

In his discourse entitled That God is not the Cause of Evil, Saint Basil the Great writes the following: "But one may say, if God is not responsible for evil things, why is it said in the book of Esaias, ‘I am He that prepared light and Who formed darkness, Who makes peace and Who creates evils’ (45 7)." And again, "There came down evils from the Lord upon the gates of Jerusalem" (Mich. 1:12). And, "Shall there be evil in the city which the Lord hath not wrought?" (Amos 3:6). And in the great Ode of Moses, "Behold, I am and there is no god beside Me. I will slay, and I will make to live; I will smite, and I will heal" (Deut. 32:39). But none of these citations, to him who understands the deeper meaning of the Holy Scriptures, casts any blame on God, as if He were the cause of evils and their creator, for He Who said, "I am the One Who makes light and darkness," shows Himself as the Creator of the universe, not that He is the creator of any evil.... "He creates evils," that means, "He fashions them again and brings them to a betterment, so that they leave their evilness, to take on the nature of good."35

As Saint Isaac the Syrian writes, "Very often many things are said by the Holy Scriptures and in it many names are used not in a literal sense… those who have a mind understand this" (Homily 83, p. 317).

Saint Basil in the same discourse 36 gives the explanation of these expressions of the Holy Scriptures: "It is because fear," says he, "edifies simpler people," and this is true not only for simple people but for all of us. After our fall, we need fear in order to do any profitable thing and any good to ourselves or to others. In order to understand the Holy Scriptures, say the Fathers, we must have in mind their purpose which is to save us, and to bring us little by little to an understanding of our Creator God and of our wretched condition.

But the same Holy Scriptures in other places explain to us more accurately who is the real cause of our evils. In Jeremias 2:17, 19 we read "Hath not thy forsaking Me brought these things upon thee? saith the Lord thy God.... Thine apostasy shall chastise thee and thy wickedness shall reprove thee; know then, and see that thy forsaking Me hath been bitter to thee, saith the Lord thy God."

The Holy Scriptures speak our language, the language which we understand in our fallen state. As Saint Gregory the Theologian says, "For according to our own comprehension, we have given names from our own attributes to those of God."37 And Saint John Damascene explains further that what in the Holy Scriptures "is said of God as if He had a body, is said symbolically… [it contains] some hidden meaning, which through things corresponding to our nature, teaches us things which exceed our nature."38

XIII

However, there are punishments imposed upon us by God, or rather evils done to us by the devil and permitted by God. But these punishments are what we call pedagogical punishments. They have as their aim our correction in this life, or at least the correction of others who would take a lesson from our example and correct themselves by fear. There are also punishments which do not have the purpose of correcting anybody but simply put an end to evil by putting an end to those who are propagating it, so that the earth may be saved from perpetual corruption and total destruction; such was the case in the flood during Noah’s time, and in Sodom’s destruction.39

All these punishments operate and have their purpose in this corrupted state of things; they do not extend beyond this corrupted life. Their purpose is to correct what can be corrected, and to change things toward a better condition, while things can still change in this changing world. After the Common Resurrection no change whatever can take place. Eternity and incorruptibility are the state of unchangeable things; no alterations whatever happen then, only developments in the state chosen by free personalities; eternal and infinite developments but no changing, no alteration of direction, no going back. The changing world we see around us is changing because it is corruptible. The eternal New Heavens and New Earth which God will bring about in His Second Coming are incorruptible, that means, not changing. So in this New World there can be no correction whatever; therefore, pedagogical punishments are no longer necessary. Any punishment from God in this New World of Resurrection would be clearly and without a doubt a revengeful act, inappropriate and motivated by hate, without any good intention or purpose.

If we consider hell as a punishment from God, we must admit that it is a senseless punishment, unless we admit that God is an infinitely wicked being.

As Saint Isaac the Syrian says: "He who applies pedagogical punishments in order to give health, is punishing with love, but he who is looking for vengeance, is devoid of love. God punishes with love, not defending Himself—far be it—but He wants to heal His image, and He does not keep His wrath for long. This way of love is the way of uprightness, and it does not change with passion to a defense. A man who is just and wise is like God because he never chastises a man in revenge for wickedness, but only in order to correct him or that others be afraid" (Homily 73).

So we see that God punishes as long as there is hope for correction. After the Common Resurrection there is no question of any punishment from God. Hell is not a punishment from God but a self condemnation. As Saint Basil the Great says, "The evils in hell do not have God as their cause, but ourselves."40

XIV

One could insist, however, that the Sacred Scriptures and the Fathers always speak of God as the Great Judge who will reward those who were obedient to Him and will punish those who were disobedient, in the day of the Great Judgment (11 Tim. 4:6-8). How are we to understand this judgment if we are to understand the divine words not in a human but in a divine manner? What is God’s judgment?

God is Truth and Light. God’s judgment is nothing else than our coming into contact with truth and light. In the day of the Great Judgment all men will appear naked before this penetrating light of truth. The "books" will be opened. What are these "books"? They are our hearts. Our hearts will be opened by the penetrating light of God, and what is in these hearts will be revealed. If in those hearts there is love for God, those hearts will rejoice seeing God’s light. If, on the contrary, there is hatred for God in those hearts, these men will suffer by receiving on their opened hearts this penetrating light of truth which they detested all their life.

So that which will differentiate between one man and another will not be a decision of God, a reward or a punishment from Him, but that which was in each one’s heart; what was there during all our life will be revealed in the Day of Judgment. If there is a reward and a punishment in this revelation—and there really is—it does not come from God but from the love or hate which reigns in our heart. Love has bliss in it, hatred has despair, bitterness, grief, affliction, wickedness, agitation, confusion, darkness, and all the other interior conditions which compose hell (I Cor. 4:6).

The Light of Truth, God’s Energy, God’s grace which will fall on men unhindered by corrupt conditions in the Day of Judgment, will be the same to all men. There will be no distinction whatever. All the difference lies in those who receive, not in Him Who gives. The sun shines on healthy and diseased eyes alike, without any distinction. Healthy eyes enjoy light and because of it see clearly the beauty which surrounds them. Diseased eyes feel pain, they hurt, suffer, and want to hide from this same light which brings such great happiness to those who have healthy eyes.

But alas, there is no longer any possibility of escaping God’s light. During this life there was. In the New Creation of the Resurrection, God will be everywhere and in everything. His light and love will embrace all. There will be no place hidden from God, as was the case during our corrupt life in the kingdom of the prince of this world.4l The devil’s kingdom will be despoiled by the Common Resurrection and God will take possession again of His creation.42 Love will enrobe everything with its sacred Fire which will flow like a river from the throne of God and will irrigate paradise. But this same river of Love—for those who have hate in their hearts—will suffocate and burn.

"For our God is a consuming fire" (Heb. 12:29). The very fire which purifies gold, also consumes wood. Precious metals shine in it like the sun, rubbish burns with black smoke. All are in the same fire of Love. Some shine and others become black and dark. In the same furnace steel shines like the sun, whereas clay turns dark and is hardened like stone.

The difference is in man, not in God. The difference is conditioned by the free choice of man, which God respects absolutely. God’s judgment is the revelation of the reality which is in man.

XV

Thus Saint Macarius writes, "And as the kingdom of darkness, and sin, are hidden in the soul until the Day of Resurrection, when the bodies also of sinners shall be covered with the darkness that is now hidden in the soul, so also the Kingdom of Light, and the Heavenly Image, Jesus Christ, now mystically enlighten the soul, and reign in the soul of the saints, but are hidden from the eyes of men… until the Day of Resurrection; but then the body also shall be covered and glorified with the Light of the Lord, which is now in the man’s soul [from this earthly life], that the body also may reign with the soul which from now receives the Kingdom of Christ and rests and is enlightened with eternal light" (Homily 2).

Saint Symeon the New Theologian says that it is not what man does which counts in eternal life but what he is, whether he is like Jesus Christ our Lord, or whether he is different and unlike Him. He says, "In the future life the Christian is not examined if he has renounced the whole world for Christ’s love, or if he has distributed his riches to the poor or if he fasted or kept vigil or prayed, or if he wept and lamented for his sins, or if he has done any other good in this life, but he is examined attentively if he has any similitude with Christ, as a son does with his father."

XVI

Saint Peter the Damascene writes: "We all receive God’s blessings equally. But some of us, receiving God’s fire, that is, His word, become soft like beeswax, while the others like clay become hard as stone. And if we do not want Him, He does not force any of us, but like the sun He sends His rays and illuminates the whole world, and he who wants to see Him, sees Him, whereas the one who does not want to see Him, is not forced by Him. And no one is responsible for this privation of light except the one who does not want to have it.

God created the sun and the eye. Man is free to receive the sun’s light or not. The same is true here. God sends the light of knowledge like rays to all, but He also gave us faith like an eye. The one who wants to receive knowledge through faith, keeps it by his works, and so God gives him more willingness, knowledge, and power" (Philokalia, vol. 3, p. 8).

XVII

I think that by now we have reached the point of understanding correctly what eternal hell and eternal paradise really are, and who is in reality responsible for the difference.

In the icon of the Last Judgment we see Our Lord Jesus Christ seated on a throne. On His right we see His friends, the blessed men and women who lived by His love. On His left we see His enemies, all those who passed their life hating Him, even if they appeared to be pious and reverent. And there, in the midst of the two, springing from Christ’s throne, we see a river of fire coming toward us. What is this river of fire? Is it an instrument of torture? Is it an energy of vengeance coming out from God in order to vanquish His enemies?

No, nothing of the sort. This river of fire is the river which "came out from Eden to water the paradise" of old (Gen. 2:10). It is the river of the grace of God which irrigated God’s saints from the beginning. In a word, it is the out-pouring of God’s love for His creatures. Love is fire. Anyone who loves knows this. God is Love, so God is Fire. And fire consumes all those who are not fire themselves, and renders bright and shining all those who are fire themselves (Heb. 12:29).

God many times appeared as fire: To Abraham, to Moses in the burning bush, to the people of Israel showing them the way in the desert as a column of fire by night and as a shining cloud by day when He covered the tabernacle with His glory (Exod. 40:28, 32), and when He rained fire on the summit of Mount Sinai. God was revealed as fire on the mountain of Transfiguration, and He said that He came "to put fire upon the earth" (Luke 12:49), that is to say, love, because as Saint John of the Ladder says, "Love is the source of fire" (Step 30, 18).

The Greek writer, Fotis Kontoglou said somewhere that "Faith is fire, and gives warmth to the heart. The Holy Spirit came down upon the heads of the apostles in the form of tongues of fire. The two disciples, when the Lord was revealed to them, said ‘Did not our heart burn within us, while He talked with us in the way?’ Christ compares faith to a ‘burning candle.’ Saint John the Forerunner said in his sermons that Christ will baptize men ‘in the Holy Spirit and fire.’ And truly, the Lord said, ‘I am come to send fire on the earth and what will I if it be already kindled?’ Well, the most tangible characteristic of faith is warmth; this is why they speak about ‘warm faith,’ or ‘faith provoking warmth.’ And even as the distinctive mark of faith is warmth, the sure mark of unbelief is coldness.

"Do you want to know how to understand if a man has faith or unbelief? If you feel warmth coming out of him—from his eyes, from his words, from his manners—be certain that he has faith in his heart. If again you feel cold coming out of his whole being, that means that he has not faith, whatever he may say. He may kneel down, he may bend his head humbly, he may utter all sorts of moral teachings with a humble voice, but all these will breathe forth a chilling breath which falls upon you to numb you with cold"43

Saint Isaac the Syrian says that "Paradise is the love of God, in which the bliss of all the beatitudes is contained," and that "the tree of life is the love of God" (Homily 72).

"Do not deceive yourself," says Saint Symeon the New Theologian, "God is fire and when He came into the world, and became man, He sent fire on the earth, as He Himself says; this fire turns about searching to find material—that is a disposition and an intention that is good—to fall into and to kindle; and for those in whom this fire will ignite, it becomes a great flame, which reaches Heaven.... this flame at first purifies us from the pollution of passions and then it becomes in us food and drink and light and joy, and renders us light ourselves because we participate in His light" (Discourse 78).

God is a loving fire, and He is a loving fire for all: good or bad. There is, however, a great difference in the way people receive this loving fire of God. Saint Basil says that "the sword of fire was placed at the gate of paradise to guard the approach to the tree of life; it was terrible and burning toward infidels, but kindly accessible toward the faithful, bringing to them the light of day."44 The same loving fire brings the day to those who respond to love with love, and burns those who respond to love with hatred.

Paradise and hell are one and the same River of God, a loving fire which embraces and covers all with the same beneficial will, without any difference or discrimination. The same vivifying water is life eternal for the faithful and death eternal for the infidels; for the first it is their element of life, for the second it is the instrument of their eternal suffocation; paradise for the one is hell for the other. Do not consider this strange. The son who loves his father will feel happy in his father’s arms, but if he does not love him, his father’s loving embrace will be a torment to him. This also is why when we love the man who hates us, it is likened to pouring lighted coals and hot embers on his head.

"I say," writes Saint Isaac the Syrian, "that those who are suffering in hell, are suffering in being scourged by love.... It is totally false to think that the sinners in hell are deprived of God’s love. Love is a child of the knowledge of truth, and is unquestionably given commonly to all. But love’s power acts in two ways: it torments sinners, while at the same time it delights those who have lived in accord with it" (Homily 84).

God is love. If we really believe this truth, we know that God never hates, never punishes, never takes vengeance. As Abba Ammonas says, "Love never hates anyone, never reproves anyone, never condemns anyone, never grieves anyone, never abhors anyone, neither faithful nor infidel nor stranger nor sinner nor fornicator, nor anyone impure, but instead it is precisely sinners, and weak and negligent souls that it loves more, and feels pain for them and grieves and laments, and it feels sympathy for the wicked and sinners, more than for the good, imitating Christ Who called sinners, and ate and drank with them. For this reason, showing what real love is, He taught saying, ‘Become good and merciful like your Father in Heaven,’ and as He rains on bad and good and makes the sun to rise on just and unjust alike, so also is the one who has real love, and has compassion, and prays for all."45

XVIII

Now if anyone is perplexed and does not understand how it is possible for God’s love to render anyone pitifully wretched and miserable and even burning as it were in flames, let him consider the elder brother of the prodigal son. Was he not in his father’s estate? Did not everything in it belong to him? Did he not have his father’s love? Did his father not come himself to entreat and beseech him to come and take part in the joyous banquet? What rendered him miserable and burned him with inner bitterness and hate? Who refused him anything? Why was he not joyous at his brother’s return? Why did he not have love either toward his father or toward his brother? Was it not because of his wicked, inner disposition? Did he not remain in hell because of that? And what was this hell? Was it any separate place? Were there any instruments of torture? Did he not continue to live in his father’s house? What separated him from all the joyous people in the house if not his own hate and his own bitterness? Did his father, or even his brother, stop loving him? Was it not precisely this very love which hardened his heart more and more? Was it not the joy that made him sad? Was not hatred burning in his heart, hatred for his father and his brother, hatred for the love of his father toward his brother and for the love of his brother toward his father? This is hell: the negation of love; the return of hate for love; bitterness at seeing innocent joy; to be surrounded by love and to have hate in one’s heart. This is the eternal condition of all the damned. They are all dearly loved. They are all invited to the joyous banquet. They are all living in God’s Kingdom, in the New Earth and the New Heavens. No one expels them. Even if they wanted to go away they could not flee from God’s New Creation, nor hide from God’s tenderly loving omnipresence. Their only alternative would be, perhaps, to go away from their brothers and search for a bitter isolation from them, but they could never depart from God and His love. And what is more terrible is that in this eternal life, in this New Creation, God is everything to His creatures. As Saint Gregory of Nyssa says, "In the present life the things we have relations with are numerous, for instance time, air, locality, food and drink, clothing, sunlight, lamplight, and other necessities of life, none of which, many though they be, are God; that blessed state which we hope for is in need of none of these things, but the Divine Being will become all, and in the stead of all to us, distributing Himself proportionately to every need of that existence. It is plain, too, from the Holy Scriptures that God becomes to those who deserve it, locality and home and clothing and food and drink and light and riches and kingdom, and everything that can be thought of and named that goes to make our life happy" (On the Soul and the Resurrection).46

In the new eternal life, God will be everything to His creatures, not only to the good but also to the wicked, not only to those who love Him, but likewise to those who hate Him. But how will those who hate Him endure to have everything from the hands of Him Whom they detest? Oh, what an eternal torment is this, what an eternal fire, what a gnashing of teeth!

Depart from Me, ye cursed, into the everlasting inner fire of hatred,47 saith the Lord, because I was thirsty for your love and you did not give it to Me, I was hungry for your blessedness and you did not offer it to Me, I was imprisoned in My human nature and you did not come to visit Me in My church; you are free to go where your wicked desire wishes, away from Me, in the torturing hatred of your hearts which is foreign to My loving heart which knows no hatred for anyone. Depart freely from love to the everlasting torture of hate, unknown and foreign to Me and to those who are with Me, but prepared by freedom for the devil, from the days I created My free, rational creatures. But wherever you go in the darkness of your hating hearts, My love will follow you like a river of fire, because no matter what your heart has chosen, you are and you will eternally continue to be, My children. Amen.




Back
Home



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes:

CHAPTER II

1 "This is evil: estrangement from God." St. Basil the Great, That God is Not the Cause of Evils, {Ellhnes Pateres ths Ekklhsias [Greek Fathers of the Church] 7, 112 (hereafter cited as EPE). "As many… as stand apart in their will from God, He brings upon them separation from Himself; and separation from God is death." St. Irenaeus Against Heresies 5. 27.2. "Men, rejecting eternal things and through the counsel of the devil turning toward the things of corruption, became the cause to themselves of the corruption in death." St. Athanasius the Great On the Incarnation 5 (Migne, PG 25.104-105)."For as much as he departed from life, just so much did he draw nearer to death. For life is God; deprivation of life is death. So Adam was the author of death to himself through his departure from God." St. Basil the Great (PG 31. 345 ) .

2 "The redemptive sacrifice…was accomplished in order to reestablish the formerly harmonious relation between heaven and earth which sin had overturned, to atone for the flounted moral law, to satisfy the affronted justice of God." Encyclical Letter for Pascha 1980 of Ecumenical Patriarch Demetrios, Episkepsis (in Greek), no. 229, 15 April 1980.

3 "Truly foolish, therefore, and lacking all understanding and mind is he who says there is no God. Alongside him no less in this madness is he who says that God is the cause of evils. I consider their sins to be of equal gravity because each one similarly denies the good; the former denies that He exists at all, while the latter defines Him as not being good; for if he is the cause of evils, He is clearly not good; so from both sides there is a denial of God." St. Basil the Great, EPE, op. cit., 7, 90.

CHAPTER IV

4 "But someone will say, verily Adam fell, and by disregarding the divine commandment he was condemned to corruption and death, but how were the many made sinful on his account? What do his transgressions have to do with us? How is it that we who were not even born were condemned along with him, and yet God says, ‘The fathers shall not be put to death for the children and the sons shall not be put to death for the fathers; everyone shall die in his own sin’? (Deut. 24:18). Surely, then, that soul that sins shall die; but we became sinners through the disobedience of Adam in this way: For Adam was created for incorruption and life, and his life in the Paradise of delight was holy, his whole mind was continually caught up in divine visions, and his body was tranquil and serene, since every shameful pleasure was calmed, for there was no disturbance of intemperate emotions in him. However, since he fell under sin and sank into corruption, thence pleasures and pollutions penetrated into the nature of the flesh, and so there was planted in our members a savage law. Nature became diseased with sin through the disobedience of the one, i.e, Adam; thus the many also became sinners, not as transgressing together with Adam—for they did not exist at all—but as being from his nature which had fallen under the law of sin… because of disobedience, human nature in Adam became infirm with corruption, and so the passions were introduced into it.... " St. Cyril of Alexandria Interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans (PG 74. 788-789). "And furthermore, if they who were born from Adam became sinners on account of his sinning, in all justice, they are not liable, for they did not become sinners of themselves; therefore the term "sinners" is used instead of "mortals" because death is the penalty of sin. Since in the first-fashioned man nature became mortal, all they who share in the nature of the forefather consequently share mortality also." Euthymios Zigabenos, Interpretation of the Epistle to the Romans, 5:19.

5 It means something totally different from what we customarily mean by the term "justice." This ignorance has caused us to consider as touchstones of Orthodoxy some very strange theories, most particularly the juridical conception of salvation which is based upon a justice that resembles the Necessity (Ananke) of the ancients, and oppresses not only man but God also, and gives a gloomy aspect to Christianity. See the relevant study of S. Lynonnett "La Soteriologie Paulienne," Introduction a la Bible 11, (Belgium: Desclées & Bower), p. 840.

6 "If a man readily and joyfully accepts a loss for the sake of God, he is inwardly pure. And if he does not look down upon any man because of his defects, in very truth he is free. If a man is not pleased with someone who honors him, nor displeased with someone who dishonors him, he is dead to the world and to this life. The watchfulness of discernment is superior to every discipline of men accomplished in any way to any degree.

"Do not hate the sinner. For we are all laden with guilt. If for the sake of God you are moved to oppose him, weep over him. Why do you hate him? Hate his sins and pray for him, that you may imitate Christ Who was not wroth with sinners, but interceded for them. Do you not see how He wept over Jerusalem? We are mocked by the devil in many instances, so why should we hate the man who is mocked by him who mocks us also? Why, O man, do you hate the sinner? Could it be because he is not so righteous as you? But where is your righteousness when you have no love? Why do you not shed tears over him? But you persecute him. In ignorance some are moved with anger, presuming themselves to be discerners of the works of sinners.

"Be a herald of God’s goodness, for God rules over you, unworthy though you are; for although your debt to Him is so great, yet He is not seen exacting payment from you, and from the small works you do, He bestows great rewards upon you. Do not call God just, for His justice is not manifest in the things concerning you. And if David calls Him just and upright (cf. Ps. 24:8, 144:17), His Son revealed to us that He is good and kind. ‘He is good,’ He says, ‘to the evil and to the impious’ (cf. Luke 6:35). How can you call God just when you come across the Scriptural passage on the wage given to the workers? ‘Friend, I do thee no wrong I will give unto this last even as unto thee. Is thine eye evil because I am good?’ (Matt. 20:12-15). How can a man call God just when he comes across the passage on the prodigal son who wasted his wealth with riotous living, how for the compunction alone which he showed, the father ran and fell upon his neck and gave him authority over all his wealth? (Luke 15:11 ff.). None other but His very Son said these things concerning Him, lest we doubt it; and thus He bare witness concerning Him. Where, then, is God’s justice, for whilst we are sinners Christ died for us! (cf. Rom. 5:8). But if here He is merciful, we may believe that He will not change [i.e., as regards the state after death, which St. Isaac mentions again a little below] .

"Far be it that we should ever think such an iniquity that God could become unmerciful! For the property of Divinity does not change as do mortals. God does not acquire something which He does not have, nor lose what He has, nor supplement what He does have, as do created beings. But what God has from the beginning, He will have and has until the [unending] end, as the blest Cyril wrote in his commentary on Genesis. Fear God, he says, out of love for Him, and not for the austere name that He has been given. Love Him as you ought to love Him; not for what He will give you in the future, but for what we have received, and for this world alone which He has created for us. Who is the man that can repay Him? Where is His repayment to be found in our works? Who persuaded Him in the beginning to bring us into being? Who intercedes for us before Him, when we shall possess no [faculty of] memory, as though we never existed? Who will awake this our body [Syriac: our corruption] for that life? Again, whence descends the notion of knowledge into dust? O the wondrous mercy of God! O the astonishment at the bounty of our God and Creator! O might for which all is possible! O the immeasurable goodness that brings our nature again, sinners though we be, to His regeneration and rest! Who is sufficient to glorify Him? He raises up the transgressor and blasphemer, he renews dust unendowed with reason, making it rational and comprehending and the scattered and insensible dust and the scattered senses He makes a rational nature worthy of thought. The sinner is unable to comprehend the grace of His resurrection. Where is gehenna, that can afflict us? Where is perdition, that terrifies us in many ways and quenches the joy of His love? And what is gehenna as compared with the grace of His resurrection, when He will raise us from hades and cause our corruptible nature to be clad in incorruption, and raise up in glory him that has fallen into Hades?

"Come, men of discernment, and be filled with wonder! Whose mind is sufficiently wise and marvelous to wonder worthily at the bounty of our Creator? His recompense of sinners is, that instead of a just recompense, He rewards them with resurrection, and instead of those bodies with which they trampled upon His law, He enrobes them with perfect glory and incorruption [St. Isaac speaks here of those who have repented, as is evident from other similar passages in his book.] That grace whereby we are resurrected after we have sinned is greater than the grace which brought us into being when we were not. Glory be to Thine immeasurable grace, O Lord! Behold, Lord, the waves of Thy grace close my mouth with silence, and there is not a thought left in me before the face of Thy thanksgiving. What mouths can confess Thy praise, O good King, Thou Who lovest our life? Glory be to Thee for the two worlds which Thou hast created for our growth and delight, leading us by all things which Thou didst fashion to the knowledge of Thy glory, from now and unto the ages. Amen." St. Isaac the Syrian, Homily 60.

7 Ibid.

8 "‘For God so loved the world as to give His Only-begotten Son unto death for it.’ Not that He could not have redeemed us by another means, but He wished to manifest to us His boundless love, and to draw us near Him through the death of His Only-begotten Son. Indeed, if He had anything more precious than His Son, He would have given it for our sakes, in order that through it our race would be found nigh to Him. Out of His abundant love, He was not pleased to do violence to our freedom, although it was possible for Him to do so; but He let it be in order that we would draw nigh to Him with the love and volition of our own will." St. Isaac the Syrian, Homily 81.

9 "In times of despondency, never fail to bear in mind the Lord’s commandment to Peter, to forgive a person who sins seventy times seven. For He who gave this command to another will Himself do far more." St. John Climacus, Ladder of Divine Ascent, Step 26, (Boston: Holy Transfiguration Monastery, 1978), p. 147.

10 "A man who is just and wise is like God because he never chastises a man in revenge for wickedness, but only in order to correct him, or that others be afraid." St. Isaac the Syrian, Homily 73. "God granted this great benefit to man: that he not abide in sin unto eternity." Theophilus of Antioch To Autolycus 2.26.

11 "And God saw all the things that He had made, and behold, they were very good." Genesis 1:31 " [God] created everything whIch has good qualities, but the profligacy of the demons has made use of the productions of nature for evil purposes, and the appearance of evil which these wear is from them and not from the perfect God." Tatian Address to the Greeks 17. "The construction of the world is good, but the life men live in it is bad." Ibid. 19. "For nothing from the first was made evil by God, but things good, yea, very good." Theophilus of Antioch To Autolycus 2.17. "Pour l’hebreau, le sensible n’est pas mauvais, ni fautif. Le mal ne vient pas de la matiere. Le monde est tres bon." ["For the Hebrew, perceptible things are not evil, nor are they deceptive lit., erroneous). Evil does not come from matter. The world is ‘very good,’"] C. Tresmontant, Essai sur la Pensee Hebraique Paris 1953). "There is nothing that exist which does not partake of the beautiful and the good." St. Dionysius the Areopagite On The Divine Names ( Pg 3. 704). "For even if the reasons why some things come about escape us, let that dogma be certain in our souls that nothing evil is done by the good." St. Basil the Great, ElIE 7, 112. "For it is not the part of a god to incite to things against nature... But God, being perfectly good, is eternally doing good." Athenagoras, Embassy, 26.

I2 "The devil is evil in such wise that he is evil in disposition, but not that his nature is opposed to good." St. Basil the Great, EPE, 7, 112. "Since God is good, whatever he does, He does for man’s sake. But whatever man does, he does for his own sake, both what is good and what is evil."Philokalia, vol. 1, chapter 121, St. Anthony the Great.

l3 "For God made not death, neither hath He pleasure in the destruction of the living, for he created all things that they might have their being, and the generations of the world were healthful, and there is no poison of destruction in them, nor the kingdom of Hades upon the earth." Wisdom of Solomon 1:13-14. "For God created man to be immortal and made him to be in an image of his own eternity. Nevertheless, through envy of the devil came death into the world." Wisdom of Solomon 2:23-24.

14 "And so he who was made in the likeness of God, since the more powerful spirit [the Holy Spirit] is separated from him, becomes mortal." Tatian Address to the Greeks 7.

15 "For as much as he departed from life, just so much did he draw nearer to death. For God is life; deprivation of life is death. So Adam was the author of death to himself through his departure from God, in accordance with the scripture which says ‘For behold, they that remove themselves from Thee shall perish.’" Psalm 72:27.

16 "Thus God did not create death, but we brought it upon ourselves out of an evil disposition. Nevertheless, He did not hinder the dissolution on account of the aforementioned causes, so that He would not make the infirmity immortal in us." St. Basil the Great (PG 31. 345).

17 "But as many as depart from God by their own choice, He inflicts that separation from Himself which they have chosen of their own accord. But separation from God is death, and separation from light is darkness.... It is not, however, that the light has inflicted upon them the penalty of darkness." St. Irenaeus Against Heresies 5. 27:2. "But others shun the light and separate themselves from God...." Ibid., 5. 28:1.

18 Philokalia, vol. 2, p. 27 (Greek edition), St. Maximus the Confessor.

19 "We became the inheritors of the curse in Adam. Certainly we were not punished as though we had disobeyed that command along with him, but because he became mortal, he transmitted the sin to his seed; we were born mortals from a mortal." St. Anastasius the Sinaite, 19. Vide I. N. Karmire, Sunoyis Dofmatikes Didaskalias tes Orthodoxou Katholikes Ekklesias, p. 38.

20 "Man’s transgression against the Creator’s righteousness brought the soul’s death sentence into effect; for when our forefathers forsook God and chose to do their own will, He abandoned them, not subjecting them to constraint. And for the reasons we have stated above, God lovingly forewarned them of this sentence. But he forbore and delayed in executing the sentence of death upon the body; and while He pronounced it, He relegated its fruition to the future in the abyss of His wisdom and the superabundance of His love for man. He did not say to Adam ‘return to whence thou wast taken,’ but ‘earth thou art, and unto earth thou shalt return’ (Gen. 3:19). Those who hear this with understanding can also comprehend from these words that God ‘did not make death’ (Wisdom 1:13), either the soul’s or the body’s. For when He first gave the command, He did not say ‘in whatsoever day ye shall eat of it, die!,’ but ‘In whatsoever day ye shall eat of it, ye shall surely die’ (Gen. 2:17). Nor did He afterwards say ‘return now unto earth,’ but ‘Thou shalt return’ (Gen. 3:19), in this manner forewarning, justly permitting and not obstructing what should come to pass." St. Gregory Palamas Physical Theological Moral and Practical Chapters 51 (PG 1157-1160).

21 "The tree of knowledge itself was good, and its fruit was good. For it was not the tree that had death in it, as some think, but the disobedience which had death in it; for there was nothing else in the fruit but knowledge alone; but knowledge is good when one uses it properly." Theophilus of Antioch To Autolycus 2. 25. "The tree did not engender death, for God did not create death; but death was the consequence of disobedience." St. John Damascene Homily on Holy Saturday 10 (PG 96. 612a).

CHAPTER V

22 "‘And what is a merciful heart?’ It is the heart’s burning for the sake of the entire creation, for men, for birds, for animals, for demons and for every created thing; and by the recollection and sight of them the eyes of a merciful man pour forth abundant tears. From the strong and vehement mercy which grips his heart and from his great compassion, his heart is humbled and he cannot bear to hear or to see any injury or slight sorrow in creation. For this reason he continually offers up tearful prayer, even for irrational beasts, for the enemies of the truth and for those who harm him, that they be protected and receive mercy. And in like manner he even prays for the family of reptiles because of the great compassion that burns in his heart without measure in the likeness of God." St. Isaac the Syrian, Homily 81.

23 "It is not God who is hostile, but we; for God is never hostile." St. John Chrysostom (PG 61. 478).

CHAPTER Vl

24 See J. S. Romanides, Ton Propatorikon Amartema (Athens, 1957).

CHAPTER Vll

25 "Therefore, we believe in one God one principle, without beginning, uncreated, unbegotten, indestructible and immortal, eternal, unlimited, uncircumscribed, unbounded, infinite in power, simple, uncompounded, incorporeal, unchanging, unaffected, unchangeable, inalterate, invisible, source of goodness and justice, light intellectual and inaccessible; power which no measure can give any idea of but which is measured only by His own will, for He can do all things whatsoever He pleases; Maker of all things both visible and invisible, holding together all things and conserving them, Provider for all, governing and dominating and ruling over all in unending and immortal reign; without contradiction, filling all things, contained by nothing, but Himself containing all things, being their Conserver and first Possessor; pervading all substances without being defiled, removed far beyond all things and every substance as being supersubstantial and surpassing all, super-eminently divine and good and replete; appointing all the principalities and orders, set above every principality and order, above essence and life and speech and concept; light itself and goodness and being insofar as having neither being, nor anything else that is derived from any other; the very source of being for all things that are, of life to the living, of speech to the articulate, and the cause of all good things for all; knowing all things before they begin to be; one substance, one godhead, one virtue, one will, one operation, one principality, one power, one domination, one kingdom; known in three perfect Persons and adored with one adoration, believed in and worshipped by every rational creature, united without confusion and distinct without separation, which is beyond understanding. We believe in Father and Son and Holy Spirit in Whom we have been baptized. For it is thus that the Lord enjoined the apostles ‘Baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.’" St. John Damascene Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith 1. 8.

26 "He created without matter." St. John Chrysostom (PG 59. 308).

27 St. John Damascene, op. cit. 1.14.

28 St. John Damascene, op. cit. 1. 8.

29 "The soul without the body can do nothing, whether good or evil. The visions which some see concerning those things that are yonder are shown to them by God as a dispensation for their profit. Just as the lyre remains useless and silent if there is no one to play, so the soul and body, when they are separated, can do nothing." St. Athanasius the Great.

CHAPTER Vlll

30 "For each of these, after its kind, is a body, be it angel, or soul, or devil. Subtle though they are, still in substance, character, and image according to the subtlety of their respective natures they are subtle bodies." St. Macarius the Great, Fifty Spiritual Homilies, 4, 9.

31 "Let us go and behold in the tombs that man is bare bones, food for worms and a stench." Great Euchologion, (Venice, 1862), p. 415. "For just as the light when it sets in the evening is not lost, so man also is given over to the grave as if setting; yet he is preserved for the dawn of the resurrection." St. John Chrysostom .

CHAPTER X

32 "He who berates the Creator for not making us sinless by nature, does naught but esteem the irrational nature above the rational." St. Basil the Great, EPE, 7, 110.

CHAPTER Xll

33 Also, "Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward." Hebrews l0:35 .

34 "For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses. Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that hath said, Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." Hebrews 10:26-31.

35 St. Basil the Great, op. cit. 7, 94-96. In this particular passage, St. Basil carefully makes a distinction between the Greek verbs ktizw and dhmiourgew both of which are generally translated into English as "create." However, ktizw has a long history, beginning with the Sanskrit kshi, which, as in early Greek, meant "to people a country," "to build houses and cities," "to colonize." Later, in Greek, the word came to mean "to establish," "to build up and develop," and finally, "to produce," "create," "bring about." Having in mind these other connotations of the verb ktizw St. Basil discerned the proper implication of the word in this context and hence made a point of emphasizing this distinction.

36 Ibid. 7.98.

37 St. Gregory the Theologian Fifth Theological Oration 22 (PG 36. 157).

38 St. John Damascene, op. cit. 1.11.

CHAPTER Xlll

39 "Famines and droughts and floods are common plagues of cities and nations which check the excess of evil. Therefore, just as the physician is a benefactor even if he should cause pain or suffering to the body (for he strives with the disease, and not with the sufferer), so in the same manner God is good Who administers salvation to everyone through the means of particular chastisements. But you, not only do you not speak evilly of the physician who cuts some members, cauterizes others, and excises others again completely from the body, but you even give him money and address him as saviour because he confines the disease to a small area before the infirmity can claim the whole body. However, when you see a city crushing its inhabitants in an earthquake, or a ship going down at sea with all hands, you do not shrink from wagging a blasphemous tongue against the true Physician and Saviour." St. Basil the Great, op. cit. 7, 94. "And you may accept the phrase ‘I kill and I will make to live’ (Deut. 32:39) literally, if you wish, since fear edifies the more simple. ‘I will smite and I will heal’ (Deut. 32:39). It is profitable to also understand this phrase literally; for the smiting engenders fear, while the healing incites to love. It is permitted you, nonetheless, to attain to a loftier understanding of the utterance. I will slay through sin and make to live through righteousness. ‘But though our outward man perish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day’ (11 Cor. 4:16). Therefore, He does not slay one, and give life to another, but through the means which He slays, He gives life to a man, and He heals a man with that which He smites him, according to the proverb which says, ‘For thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from death’ (Prov. 23:14). So the flesh is chastised for the soul to be healed, and sin is put to death for righteousness to live.... When you hear ‘There shall be no evil in a city which the Lord hath not wrought’ (cf. Amos 3:6), understand by the noun ‘evil’ that the word intimates the tribulation brought upon sinners for the correction of offenses. For Scripture says, ‘For I afflicted thee and straitened thee, to do good to thee’ (cf. Deut. 8:3); so too is evil terminated before it spills out unhindered, as a strong dike or wall holds back a river.

"For these reasons, diseases of cities and nations, droughts, barrenness of the earth, and the more difficult conditions in the life of each, cut off the increase of wickedness. Thus, such evils come from God so as to uproot the true evils, for the tribulations of the body and all painful things from without have been devised for the restraining of sin. God, therefore, excises evil; never is evil from God.... The razing of cities, earthquakes and floods, the destruction of armies, shipwrecks and all catastrophes with many casualties which occur from earth or sea or air or fire or whatever cause, happen for the sobering of the survivors, because God chastises public evil with general scourges.

"The principal evil, therefore, which is sin, and which is especially worthy of the appellation of evil, depends upon our disposition; it depends upon us either to abstain from evil or to be in misery.

"Of the other evils, some are shown to be struggles for the proving of courage… while some are for the healing of sins… and some are for an example to make other men sober." St. Basil the Great, op. cit. 7, 98-102.

40 1bid. 7, 92.

CHAPTER XIV

41 "The devil became the ‘Prince of matter."’ Athenagoras, Embassy, 24, 25. "They [the demons] afterwards subdued the human race to themselves… and… sowed all wickedness. Whence also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them that did these things to men, and women, and cities, and nations which they related, ascribed them to God Himself." St. Justin Martyr Second Apology 5 .

42 "For this purpose the Son of God was manifested, that He might destroy the works of the devil." I John 3:8.

CHAPTER XVII

43 Fotis Kontoglou, "Church Calendars," Orthodoxos Typos 131 (Athens), 1 January 1971.

44 St. Basil the Great, Homily 13 . 2, Exhortation to Holy Baptism (PG 31. 428 and 95, 1272).

45 Library of Greek Fathers, vol. 40, pp. 60-61.

CHAPTER XVIII

46 "‘I am father, I am brother, I am bridegroom, I am dwelling place, I am food, I am raiment, I am root, I am foundation, all whatsoever thou willest, I am.’ ‘Be thou in need of nothing, I will be even a servant, for I came to minister, not to be ministered unto; I am friend, and member, and head, and brother, and sister, and mother; I am all; only cling thou closely to me. I was poor for thee, and a wanderer for thee, on the Cross for thee, in the tomb for thee, above I intercede for thee to the Father; on earth I am come for thy sake an ambassador from my Father. Thou art all things to me, brother, and joint heir, and friend, and member.’ What wouldest thou more?" St. John Chrysostom, Homily 76 on the Gospel of Matthew (PG 58. 700).

47 "‘The end of the world’ signifies not the annihilation of the world, but its transformation. Everything will be transformed suddenly, in the twinkling of an eye.... And the Lord will appear in glory on the clouds. Trumpets will sound, and loud, with power! They will sound in the soul and conscience! All will become clear to the human conscience. The Prophet Daniel, speaking of the Last Judgement, relates how the Ancient of Days, the Judge, sits on His throne, and before Him is a fiery stream (Dan. 7:9-10). Fire is a purifying element; it burns sins. Woe to a man if sin has become a part of his nature: then the fire will burn the man himself.

"This fire will be kindled within a man: seeing the Cross, some will rejoice, but others will fall into confusion, terror, and despair. Thus will men be divided instantly. The very state of a man’s soul casts him to one side or the other, to right or to left.

"The more consciously and persistently a man strives toward God in his life, the greater will be his joy when he hears ‘Come unto Me, ye blessed.’ And conversely the same words will call the fire of horror and torture on those who did not desire Him, who fled and fought or blasphemed Him during their lifetime!

"The Last Judgement knows of no witnesses or written protocols! Everything is inscribed in the souls of men and these records, these ‘books’, are opened at the Judgement. Everything becomes clear to all and to oneself.

"And some will go to joy, while others—to horror.

"When ‘the books are opened,’ it will become clear that the roots of all vices lie in the human soul. Here is a drunkard or a lecher: when the body has died, some may think that sin is dead too. No! There was an inclination to sin in the soul, and that sin was sweet to the soul, and if the soul has not repented of the sin and has not freed itself from it, it will come to the Last Judgement also with the same desire for sin. It will never safisty that desire and in that soul there will be the suffering of hatred. It will accuse everyone and everything in its tortured condition, it will hate everyone and everything. ‘There will be gnashing of teeth’ of powerless malice and the unquenchable fire of hatred.

"A ‘fiery gehenna’—such is the inner fire. ‘Here there will be wailing and gnashing of teeth.’ Such is the state of hell." Archbishop John Maximovitch, "The Last Judgement," Orthodox Word (November December, 1966) 177-78.

But nobody hates anything that does not exist.Not so. A person can hate a concept that does not reflect something that actually exists in reality. Alternatively, a person can hate something that he believes to exist when it actually does not.

Hell is said to exist because sin exists. But if sin exists, then where did it come from? Ultimately from God. After all, as the story goes, God created Lucifer and knowingly gave him traits that would ultimately lead to his downfall. The existence of free will does not alter God's responsibility for the fall, since God could have created Lucifer with 100% free will while simultaneously imbuing him with a perfect desire to serve God.

That's a point that needs to be emphasized. God could have created beings with perfectly free will that would still NEVER sin. We all have the free will to drink pig urine if we so choose; yet our innate instincts prevent us from doing so. No one is tempted to drink pig urine. God could very easily have made sin as naturally revolting to human beings as the thought of drinking pig urine (regardless of what Adam and Eve did or didn't do). But He didn't. That means that sin is God's responsibility, not man's. Men cannot help it if they were created as damaged goods. Furthermore, the idea of a perfect Creator creating anything flawed in such a way as to displease that Creator is absurd. A perfect Creator can NEVER create anything that could displease Himself -- it's impossible. Part of perfection is never making a mistake.

Another fatal problem with the idea of hell is that it's obviously unjust. Human beings are finite creatures who are finite in ALL respects. Hence, they cannot possibly do anything to merit infinite punishment. Even an offense against God's infinite goodness cannot merit everlasting punishment, since no human being is capable of fully comprehending anything that's infinite. Imperfect comprehension of one's crimes imply less-than-infinite moral responsibility.

Finally, there is every reason to believe that the idea of hell was borrowed from mythology and incorporated into late Judaism and early Christianity. Hell was not mentioned at all as a punishment for sin when God supposedly gave the Mosaic Law to the Israelites. Did God neglect to mention it, or did He just think it was unimportant? No -- back then, the concept of hell hadn't yet been incorporated into Judaic thought, so Yahweh had a different means of striking beyond the grave: by threatening sinners' offspring. Since people tend to care deeply about their children and grandchildren, this was a suitable threat to use until the even more threatening concept of hell came along.

To close this post, I'll paste a quote from the Roman officer and historian Polybius (~130 BC) on the usefulness of the mythology of hell:

Polybius: But among the most useful institutions, that demonstrate the superior excellence of the Roman government, the most considerable perhaps is the opinion that the people are taught to hold concerning the gods: and that, which other men regard as an object of disgrace, appears in my judgment to be the very thing by which this republic chiefly is sustained. I mean, superstition: which is impressed with all its terrors; and influences both private and public actions of the citizens, and the public administration also of the state, in a degree that can scarcely be exceeded. This may appear astonishing to many. To me it is evident, that this contrivance was at first adopted for the sake of the multitude. For if it were possible that a state could be composed of wise men only, there would be no need, perhaps, of any such invention. But as the people universally are fickle and inconsistent, filled with irregular desires, too precipitate in there passions, and prone to violence; there is no way left to restrain them, but by dread of things unseen, and by the pageantry of terrifying fiction. The ancients, therefore, acted not absurdedly, nor without good reason, when they inculcated the notions concerning the gods, and the belief of infernal punishments; but much more those of the present age are to be charged with rashness and absurdity, in endeavoring to extirpate these opinions.

Source: http://www.zianet.com/godisgood/polybius.html

Personally, I believe only saints and nuns go to heaven, whilst the rest of us evil-doers descend to the carnal flames of hell, a never ending orgy.

"I'm just saying that when we die there's going to be a planet for the French, a planet for the Chinese, and we'll all be a lot happier."-Barney Gumble

Hell is said to exist because sin exists. But if sin exists, then where did it come from? Ultimately from God. After all, as the story goes, God created Lucifer and knowingly gave him traits that would ultimately lead to his downfall.

Unless you can demonstrate how the traits God gave Satan determined him to rebel against God, your argument does not follow. At most, God merely made sin possible.

That's a point that needs to be emphasized. God could have created beings with perfectly free will that would still NEVER sin.

Correct. There are certainly logically possible worlds inhabited by beings who freely choose not to sin when the opportunity to do so arises. Why you continue to repeat this eludes me.

We all have the free will to drink pig urine if we so choose; yet our innate instincts prevent us from doing so. No one is tempted to drink pig urine. God could very easily have made sin as naturally revolting to human beings as the thought of drinking pig urine (regardless of what Adam and Eve did or didn't do).

Correct.

But He didn't. That means that sin is God's responsibility, not man's.

Non-sequitur. Your problem is that you fail to make a distinction between predisposition and determinism. Ever since the fall of Adam, man has had a predisposition to sin. Man, although drawn towards sin, has the ability to refrain from sinning. As long as man has the ability to have done otherwise on the occasions when he sins, he sins freely. If man has the power to refrain from sinning, sin is man's responsibility. The fall of Adam did not determine man to sin. If man was determined to sin, sin would indeed be God's responsibility, for man would not have the ability to refrain from sinning. Man would thus bear no responsibility for his actions, actions he could not control.

You are correct when you say God could have created a world with beings who freely choose not to sin. This however is irrelevant if your intent is to pin the blame on God for the existence of sin. As long as the beings in this world have the ability not to sin, sin is their responsibility.

Unless you can demonstrate how the traits God gave Satan determined him to rebel against God, your argument does not follow. At most, God merely made sin possible.Well, if God exists and sin exists, then it's 100% certain that God made sin possible. And God knew that sin would result from the choices that He made, but He made them anyway.


Correct. There are certainly logically possible worlds inhabited by beings who freely choose not to sin when the opportunity to do so arises. Why you continue to repeat this eludes me.Because it shows that the existence of evil is God's fault, hence there's no sense or justice at all in God punishing anyone for it. If I choose to go out in wintery weather without wearing shoes, I have no business complaining if I get frostbite, since I could have easily prevented it. If God set up creation such that He could have prevented sin but chose not to, then He has no business complaining about sin.

Futhermore, if God were infinitely holy and perfect, as Christianity and most other religions claim, then God's holiness could not be improved upon -- nothing could be added to it. But God's holiness could have been greater if He had not allowed sin to exist. Therefore, something is very wrong with the claim of Christian apologists that God allows evil to exist "for a higher good" of "to preserve free will." There IS no higher good than the infinite goodness that God is said to be; hence, sin can serve no purpose. And the issue of free will has already been addressed.


Non-sequitur. Your problem is that you fail to make a distinction between predisposition and determinism.No, I am making that distinction. I am not talking about determinism at all; I am talking about man's predisposition to sin.


Ever since the fall of Adam, man has had a predisposition to sin.I am arguing that, if that is the case, then it's God's fault.


Man, although drawn towards sin, has the ability to refrain from sinning.Not really. Having a built-in urge to sin limits free will to the extent that the urge exists. And if ALL people sin, as the Bible claims, then it can be argued that avoiding sin is effectively impossible.


As long as man has the ability to have done otherwise on the occasions when he sins, he sins freely. If man has the power to refrain from sinning, sin is man's responsibility. The fall of Adam did not determine man to sin. If man was determined to sin, sin would indeed be God's responsibility, for man would not have the ability to refrain from sinning. Man would thus bear no responsibility for his actions, actions he could not control.There are many Christians who believe that it is, in fact, impossible for men to avoid sin completely.


You are correct when you say God could have created a world with beings who freely choose not to sin. This however is irrelevant if your intent is to pin the blame on God for the existence of sin. As long as the beings in this world have the ability not to sin, sin is their responsibility.Even if God doesn't force men to sin, the fact that He didn't make it as easy as possible for people to avoid sinning shows that He isn't infinitely good. Again: being infinitely good means that your goodness cannot be improved upon. But if God could have prevented sin and didn't, then there's an easy improvement: prevent sin.


To make a long story short: If God is perfect, then His creation should be perfect. If His creation is imperfect in any way, shape, or form, then that's due to a decision that God made. An infinitely powerful and omniscient Being is 100% responsible for everything that happens, since everything can be traced back to that Being. Thus, if sin exists, it's only because God made choices that allowed for it to exist when He could have chosen otherwise. That undermines the notion that God is 100% good.

Carl, I have great respect for you, and you have done your utmost with the argument presented here, but with the following:

if God were infinitely holy and perfect,

Angler takes game, set, and match.

Specifically, it places the ongoing debate outside the parameters you set with:

Your problem is that you fail to make a distinction between predisposition and determinism.

I think your point is already well taken; predisposition is not determinism in some cases. That this points to a less perfect or less holy god seems inescapable.

If the object of God is to be known, as in Islam, then this is possible without the infinite torture of finite beings. If the object of God is to be loved, as in some forms of Christianity, then this too is possible without infinite torture of infinite duration, espcially for small infractions like not believing a rather dodgy story.

As for Judiasm, which posits a god that desires foreskins, and for which it offers land, the less said the better. Christians were wise to reject such a god and label him as ontologically inferior to their own.

WM

- "As for Judiasm, which posits a god that desires foreskins, and for which it offers land, the less said the better."


In the Old Testament, circumcision was the equivalent of New Testament baptism. Whereas baptism symbolized the washing away of the old, sinful nature of man, circumcision symbolized CUTTING away of "the old man."

Yes, you could say that the method of getting rid of sin was a bit softer in the NT...

Deuteronomy 10:16:

"Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked."


Petr

Carl, I have great respect for you, and you have done your utmost with the argument presented here, but with the following:

if God were infinitely holy and perfect,

Angler takes game, set, and match.

Specifically, it places the ongoing debate outside the parameters you set with:

Your problem is that you fail to make a distinction between predisposition and determinism.

I think your point is already well taken; predisposition is not determinism in some cases. That this points to a less perfect or less holy god seems inescapable.

If the object of God is to be known, as in Islam, then this is possible without the infinite torture of finite beings. If the object of God is to be loved, as in some forms of Christianity, then this too is possible without infinite torture of infinite duration, espcially for small infractions like not believing a rather dodgy story.

As for Judiasm, which posits a god that desires foreskins, and for which it offers land, the less said the better. Christians were wise to reject such a god and label him as ontologically inferior to their own.

WM

Good to know I've earned your respect, Wintermute. You're an insightful writer and you have excellent taste in music. Regarding Angler's argument, it is not deductively valid. "An infinitely good God exists" and "sin exists" are not explicitly contradictory. As long as it is logically possible for an infinitely good God to have a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with His infinite goodness, the conclusion of Angler's argument does not follow necessarily from its premises. For instance, an infinitely good, omniscient God may have a reason for permitting sin that we cannot apprehend with our cognitive limitations. I'm not saying that's why God permits sin, I'm just proferring it as a possible reason. So I don't see how Angler can demonstrate that "sin exists" and "an infinitely good God exists" are logically contradictory.

Further, you and Angler err when you say hell is infinite. Hell is not infinite - it is eternal. Eternity is not an infinite amount of time; it is the absence of time. The terms "before" and "after" do not apply to Hell. Therefore, being consigned to hell does not constitute infinite torture of infinite duration.

As long as it is logically possible for an infinitely good God to have a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with His infinite goodness, the conclusion of Angler's argument does not follow necessarily from its premises.If God is completely and perfectly good, and completely and perfectly powerful and able to do anything, then He could have done whatever He wanted to do without the existence of sin. An infinitely good, holy, omniscient, and omnipotent God would not need anything, let alone sin, in order to accomplish His purposes.



For instance, an infinitely good, omniscient God may have a reason for permitting sin that we cannot apprehend with our cognitive limitations.In order to appeal to human ignorance of God's will, I'd say it's first necessary to prove that God exists, had a hand in the Bible, etc. Otherwise, how do we know that "God's will is too far beyond human understanding" isn't just an umbrella argument used to dismiss inconsistencies in a man-made religion?



I'm not saying that's why God permits sin, I'm just proferring it as a possible reason. So I don't see how Angler can demonstrate that "sin exists" and "an infinitely good God exists" are logically contradictory.They are contradictory, as has been recognized even by theologians for hundreds of years. It's the classic "Problem of Evil." The existence of free will has been used as a way out of the apparent paradox; the crux of the arguments I've been making is that human free will does not necessitate the existence of evil.

Even more contradictory is the idea of a loving God that sends people to hell simply for honestly not believing in Him based on a completely implausible story or series of stories. The very idea sounds exactly like something spiteful humans would invent to intimidate people into believing a certain way. I'm not a bleeding-heart type, but I'm compassionate enough that I wouldn't even send an insect to hell after it had stung me, were I able to do so. Is it possible for a human being to deserve eternal punishment? Of course not. Nobody comes close to deserving eternal agony.

Fortunately, hell is just mythology that was adopted by Jews (I suppose from the Romans) around the time of the early Church's founding. Hell wasn't even known to the Israelites when the Torah was written, judging by the fact that God never mentioned it to them as the punishment for sin when He gave them the Ten Commandments. This fact, along with the philosophical considerations hinted at earlier, makes the idea of hell seem implausible to say the least.

Well the notion of Hell comes out of some strange jew re-interpretation of the Mythological Nordic notion of Hel. In this mythology Hel is a gloomy place old people who die of natural causes go too (itz not anywhere near as bad as Christian Hell though just want to emphasize that), as opposed to Valhalla where the warriors who die honorably in combat go to.

Further, you and Angler err when you say hell is infinite. Hell is not infinite - it is eternal. Eternity is not an infinite amount of time; it is the absence of time. The terms "before" and "after" do not apply to Hell. Therefore, being consigned to hell does not constitute infinite torture of infinite duration.

This is a lovely Hellenistic gloss on a savage Semitic text. The actual words of the "Good" Book are:

"And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever." (Revelation 20:10)

"Tormented day and night forever" couldn't be farther than your smooth Hellenistic musings about eternal things.

I suppose there's also the escape route that the lake of fire described in Revelations isn't the same one that we non Christians are headed to. That would also be an unworthy dodge. Therefore I will block your escape route with sayings from Our Lord and Savior:

Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the Devil and his angels. (Matthew 25:41)

Revelation 14:11, And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night...

Revelation 20:12, 15, And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life...And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire.

Mark 9:44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.

Matthew 22:13, ...Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

Matthew 13:41-42, The Son of man (Jesus) shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

Revelation 21:8, But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

no rest day and night . . . where their worm dieth not . . . everlasting fire . . .the fire is not quenched . . . the smoke of their torment ascendeth up forever . . . where they will be tormented day and night forever.

After examining the scriptural evidence, it seems a given your statement that "being consigned to hell does not constitute infinite torture of infinite duration" misrepresents the account of Hell as given by Our Lord and also by St. John the Revelator.

Finally, Jesus himself is explicit about time-bound phenomena such as cognition occuring in the flames of Hell, especially that most-cherished Jewish trope, begging for mercy. Staying with the Hellenistic categories you wish to apply to the Bible, we must therefore conclude that the pains of Hell are perpetual and not eternal.

Luke 16:19-31:

19. There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day:

20. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21. And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

22. And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

23. And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

24. And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame.

25. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented.

26. And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence.


Do you yield?

WM

If God is completely and perfectly good, and completely and perfectly powerful and able to do anything, then He could have done whatever He wanted to do without the existence of sin. An infinitely good, holy, omniscient, and omnipotent God would not need anything, let alone sin, in order to accomplish His purposes.

I don't think that is really relevant. You're arguing that the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness. Unless you can show that the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness in every possible world, your argument is not deductively valid. Deductively valid arguments are necessarily true, and necessary truths are true in every possible world. The example I gave of God having a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with his infinite goodness, but that we cannot grasp with our limited cognition, is just one way of showing that the existence of sin and an infinitely good God is not a logical impossibility. And if it is logically possible for a infinitely good God to have a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with his infinite goodness, then the argument you have presented is not necessarily true.

In order to appeal to human ignorance of God's will, I'd say it's first necessary to prove that God exists, had a hand in the Bible, etc.

This is evasive. When you claimed the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness, you assumed the truth of the premises (the existence of an infinitely good God) for the sake of the argument. It is therefore entirely legitimate for a critique of the validity of the argument (such as mine) to assume (for the sake of argument) the truth of the premises in order to demonstrate that the argument is invalid (i.e. fallacious).

Otherwise, how do we know that "God's will is too far beyond human understanding" isn't just an umbrella argument used to dismiss inconsistencies in a man-made religion?

It's just an example of how it's logically possible for sin and an infinitely good God to co-exist. It is not intended to be a theodicy.

They are contradictory, as has been recognized even by theologians for hundreds of years. It's the classic "Problem of Evil."

I cannot think of a single atheistic philosopher who has used the deductive version of the problem of evil as a critique of the Christian God since Alvin Plantinga demolished it in the mid-seventies with his "free will defense."

Even more contradictory is the idea of a loving God that sends people to hell simply for honestly not believing in Him based on a completely implausible story or series of stories.

Why is it contradictory for the Christian God to give non-believers what they want? The non-believer has freely rejected God's infinite love. God is just sending them to a place absent of His love.

Do you yield?

It is my understanding that hell is an eternal, timeless dimension. I do not understand "eternity" to mean bound by time. But perhaps my understanding is wrong and yours is correct. Let's just say that it is and that hell exists within time. Are you are arguing that is it contradictory for a wholly good God to sentence people to a horrible place where their sentence is indefinite?

Moreover, the Bible states that Hell was not originally made for men, but for rebellious angels. Men can blame only themselves for ending up with such company for all eternity.


Matt 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

whereas it was said about saved:

Matt 25:34 Then shall the King say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:


Petr

Are you are arguing that is it contradictory for a wholly good God to sentence people to a horrible place where their sentence is indefinite?

Where they will be tormented day and night forever? Where they have no rest day or night? As Mr. Spock once observed, there is a certain inefficiency about asking questions you already know the answers to.

WM

Where they will be tormented day and night forever? Where they have no rest day or night? As Mr. Spock once observed, there is a certain inefficiency about asking questions you already know the answers to.

Just making sure I wasn't distorting your position. Now, as to your charge that it is contradictory for an all-good God to send people to an everlasting torment, understand first that there will be different degrees of punishment dealt out according to one's knowledge of God. Those with a rudimentary understanding of God will not be punished as severely as those possessing greater knowledge of God, as explained in Luke 12:47-48. Second, the charge that finite beings commiting finite sins does not merit eternal punishment misunderstands the nature of the infraction being committed. The nature of the infraction is spiritual. Ultimately, it is our souls that are affected by the sins we commit, and our souls continue to exist after death. The sinner is only physically finite; his soul, which his sins affect, is not.

By sending man to hell, God is just giving the sinner what he wants - complete and total separation from God. The Biblical imagry of hell (flames, the gnashing of teeth, etc) is metaphorical for the anguish of those who are separated from God.

A fair presentation of the modern teachings of the Church. Your religious education has not been amiss.

I reiterate that many of your arguments are a Hellenistic gloss on a Semitic text and are therefore not strictly an accurate representation of Christianity in se, though they are, as I said, good summaries of what the Church teaches.

I find that I do not particulary want to hash this out with you. It is an unusual online occurance for me to find such a foursquare 'opponent'. You have taken care not to misrepresent me, and I hope I have done the same for you. That both of our positions are accurately stated is such a rare occurance (again, for me) that I hardly know what to do. You have me at a disadvantage.

However, in the spirit of interested discussion and not argumentation, I will offer one parting question:

By sending man to hell, God is just giving the sinner what he wants - complete and total separation from God.

Is the description above - 'giving the sinner what he wants' - really accurate? What I mean to say is this: wouldn't the sinner prefer to not be in a state of seperation from God?

If he prefers not to be in this state of seperation, and yet is - what you describe as 'wanting' - then it is clear he has made a mistake of some sort, is it not?

And if the soul has made a mistake in its choice of object - a not uncommon occurance - then isn't it true that the intended object was the Divine?

Therefore, if the soul truly desires God but has erred through some means, would not an eternal (I accept the modern teaching for sake of discussion) punishment be less appropriate than a provisional punishment, as we see in the case of Purgatory?

This is the case as outlined by Origen, one of your great teachers though now called heretic, and I fail to see how the God you present on behalf of your Church is morally comparable to the One preached by Origen.

I judge Origen's account Good. Do you concur?

Wintermute

P.S. It goes without saying that if you agree with me, even for a second, that you are doomed forever to the lake that burns with fire! Be warned. :222

- "I reiterate that many of your arguments are a Hellenistic gloss on a Semitic text and are therefore not strictly an accurate representation of Christianity in se, ..."


I hate to break it to you, Winnie, but actually those "brutal Semitic" Talmudic Rabbis were quite a bunch of sissies when it came to afterlife punishments. (Sending Jesus Christ to boiling excrement nonwithstanding)

As so many anti-Christians have whined (like Mark Twain in "Letters from the Earth", and our very own Angler), the image of God seemed to actually get much HARSHER in the NT as the afterlife punishment came into picture.

So, if you want to argue that it was those dastardly "Semites" instead of "Hellenists" that made the Christian Hell the frightful place it is today, you may want to debate with Angler who insists that OT knew of no such place.

Materialists that they were, those Jews that didn't convert to Christianity (anti-Christ Jews) were not all that enthusiastic about thinking afterlife punishments.

Even those Talmudists that subscribed to afterlife, were quite wimpy about it - why, the hell of those rabbis looks suspiciously like that of Origen!

...

"The talmudic writings indicate that some of the main Rabbinical schools at the time of Jesus had the general belief that:

really, really bad people suffered in an afterlife forever

good people (generally only Jews) went straight to heaven

moderately bad people suffered after death until they had paid for their crimes, and then they were basically annihilated--there does seem to be some residual consciousness in some of the passages though...

This is the context in which Jesus words were given....

When i get back to CA, i will send the references and supporting dox to you...[A quick summary of the position and talmudic refs are given in Cohen's Everyman's Talmud, the chapter on the Hereafter, esp. 377-379.]

this just for starters...glenn"

http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jewhell.html


And of course, the likes of Dante "paganized" Hell with many exquisite tortures that they derived from ancient pagan literature...


Petr

I don't think that is really relevant. You're arguing that the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness. Unless you can show that the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness in every possible world, your argument is not deductively valid. Deductively valid arguments are necessarily true, and necessary truths are true in every possible world.If God is infinitely good, then by the very definition of "infinity," his goodness knows no bounds. In other words, it is impossible to conceive of any way that God's goodness could be improved upon or added to. But there is a way it could be greater: there could be no sin or suffering in the world. Since an infinite Being lacks nothing -- again, by the very definition of "infinite" -- such a lack of sin and suffering would not hinder any "plans" of said infinite Being. Whatever plans God has for the universe, He could have easily accomplished them without any suffering on the part of defenseless humans who never asked to be created and put in jeopardy of eternal punishment in the first place.


The example I gave of God having a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with his infinite goodness, but that we cannot grasp with our limited cognition, is just one way of showing that the existence of sin and an infinitely good God is not a logical impossibility. And if it is logically possible for a infinitely good God to have a reason for permitting sin that is in harmony with his infinite goodness, then the argument you have presented is not necessarily true.But it IS a logical impossibility. Evil cannot be in harmony with infinite goodness, since that places a bound on the infinite goodness. Something that is infinite cannot be bounded in any way.


This is evasive. When you claimed the existence of sin negates God's infinite goodness, you assumed the truth of the premises (the existence of an infinitely good God) for the sake of the argument. It is therefore entirely legitimate for a critique of the validity of the argument (such as mine) to assume (for the sake of argument) the truth of the premises in order to demonstrate that the argument is invalid (i.e. fallacious).I was not trying to be evasive; rather, I was making an argument by contradiction. I was supposing the truth of the premises in order to show that they led to a contradictory conclusion, or at least a highly implausible one.



It's just an example of how it's logically possible for sin and an infinitely good God to co-exist. It is not intended to be a theodicy.I'm afraid you haven't shown that it is logically possible for infinite goodness to create evil (or at least create the potential for evil). What you've essentially said is: "It could be this way -- we just might not understand it." But I could just as easily declare that, say, a jar can simultaneously contain both nothing and something, and answer objections by saying, "We might not understand how this is possible, but it could be possible." It doesn't work, though; emptiness and the property of containing something are mutually exclusive, just like (in the Christian tradition) good and evil are mutually exclusive.



I cannot think of a single atheistic philosopher who has used the deductive version of the problem of evil as a critique of the Christian God since Alvin Plantinga demolished it in the mid-seventies with his "free will defense."I am not familiar with Plantinga, but I maintain that free will by no means resolves the Problem of Evil.



Why is it contradictory for the Christian God to give non-believers what they want? The non-believer has freely rejected God's infinite love. God is just sending them to a place absent of His love.Nobody (no sane person, anyway) wants to spend eternity in agony. And in order to reject God's love, you have to believe in God first; you can't reject what you don't believe in. If someone honestly doesn't believe in God or doubts His existence (or maybe just doubts Christianity), then that is not grounds for just punishment.

Moreover, as WM pointed out, why couldn't God simply allow unbelievers to change their minds after death, once they've seen their error? Or, for that matter, if there really is a God who cares about people, then WHY does He hide behind the veils of death? Why does God insist on playing a guessing game with men, and one with eternal stakes to boot? If God really loved everyone, He would make His existence obvious and then allow them to choose or reject Him. It all only makes sense if we decide that Christianity (and other "revealed religions") is a manufactured belief system that promises reward or peril after death in order to control men in the present life.

As so many anti-Christians have whined (like Mark Twain in "Letters from the Earth", and our very own Angler), the image of God seemed to actually get much HARSHER in the NT as the afterlife punishment came into picture."Came into picture," eh? Well, why wasn't it in the picture beforehand, if God is unchanging? Why didn't God threaten the Israelites with hell, explaining its torments in detail, when He gave them the 10 Commandments? Or why didn't He warn Adam and Eve of the dangers of hell for them and their offspring if they ate that apple [snicker]?

Face it, Petr: It makes no sense unless hell was a fabrication of men that was tossed into the mash of Judaic thought late in the game.

I only said that YOU guys said it "came into picture."

I didn't concede anything.


Petr