Marilyn McCord Adams and the Problem of Hell

[lismore]

She begins with two premises
G: God exists, and is essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good
H: Some created persons will be consigned to hell forever

It's because God is perfectly good that there is a hell.

To protect his sheep from unrepentant wolves.

 

[public hermit]

Only God knows the difference why Saul was a worthwhile investment, as opposed to others.

God said,
“...I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and
I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” Exodus 33:19 NKJV
and,
“For as the heavens are higher than the earth,
So are My ways higher than your ways,
And My thoughts than your thoughts." Isaiah 55:9 NKJV

That means God is either flippant on whom He receives, or He has good reasons that are beyond our understanding.

Well said. The fact is we just don't know why God chooses some like Paul and not others. Nor do we know that God doesn't choose all, I suppose. Maybe God's ways in deciding to choose all transcends our thoughts and ways. Can we say God's ways are above our ways, and yet be confident that God will punish some forever? I know many feel that is precisely the case, but it doesn't seem warranted. The same can be said for those whom God chooses to show compassion. Can we say with confidence who God will show compassion to, or is that still up to God?

 

[public hermit]

It's because God is perfectly good that there is a hell.

To protect his sheep from unrepentant wolves.

Interesting! Can those in heaven be corrupted? Perhaps they can. That is a fascinating take because I think most assume our struggles are over once there. But maybe we are still susceptible to sin?

 

[mindfulzen]

So, do you reject that premise that says if God were all powerful, God would be able to avoid sending people to hell forever. Perhaps God is not more powerful than human hate?

No, but you lack an object in the equation. Humanbeings who are willful, often wrong and stubborn. Some are ignorant of scripture, some have no faith, some are evil. Since you called hell for H, then this is M for man. Not sure, but circuimstances and reaction should perhaps be there too. People get a choice, and if my choices are empirical evidence for me, it is like 95% wrong choices made.

 

[Sabertooth]

Or, are you just saying the argument holds pre-angelic fall?

If it was ever true, that was the only time it could be.

(Within the scope of our understanding) there was no one on whom He must exercise Judgment prior to the Angelic Rebellion. It was a trait that wasn't in evidence.

 

[chevyontheriver]

We all do, in some way or another, I think. We are brought into a situation where we can not do all the good we want, and certainly not all we should, which is why Xns embrace grace. It makes sense given our condition.

So, perhaps God is not perfectly good, and will only extend grace to those whom God chooses. Maybe God is more free than we assume, i.e. free in regards to goodness, free to destroy or torment those who could have been saved by grace. Or, perhaps God is limited in having the power to save, saving only those who freely want to be saved? No matter where we place the freedom, it seems God could avoid sending people to hell unless we limit one of the divine attributes, which may actually be the case. I don't know.

I think God is good, all powerful, and all knowing, but that we just can't see it. So we think God is a lesser being with limits. I'm not talking about the silly limits like whether God can make a rock He cannot lift. I'm thinking a free God made us free in His image, and that has real consequences for God permitting what he does not enjoy.

 

[public hermit]

No, but you lack an object in the equation. Humanbeings who are willful, often wrong and stubborn. Some are ignorant of scripture, some have no faith, some are evil. Since you called hell for H, then this is M for man. Not sure, but circuimstances and reaction should perhaps be there too. People get a choice, and if my choices are empirical evidence for me, it is like 95% wrong choices made.

Good point, humanity isn't really part of the argument, except in H. Isn't God capable of overcoming willful, sinful, stubborn, humans? Maybe not? If God is capable, why doesn't God do whatever is necessary to ensure that all come around? Perhaps what the argument needs is a proper account of human freedom and the constraints that puts on God to save? That is how Plantinga defeated Mackie's argument, which is similar to this one. I think you're on the most promising path, at any rate.

 

[public hermit]

I'm thinking a free God made us free in His image, and that has real consequences for God permitting what he does not enjoy.

I'm repeating myself, but I do think this is the most promising response. I also agree that there is a lot involved that is just beyond are epistemic ken.

 

[mindfulzen]

Good point, humanity isn't really part of the argument, except in H. Isn't God capable of overcoming willful, sinful, stubborn, humans? Maybe not? If God is capable, why doesn't God do whatever is necessary to ensure that all come around? Perhaps what the argument needs is a proper account of human freedom and the constraints that puts on God to save? That is how Plantinga defeated Mackie's argument, which is similar to this one. I think you're on the most promising path, at any rate.

Is capable, but as I understand it, not willing, if we do not free our hearts of hate, and pray to join heaven. We must cleanse our hearts to get it. How can we get the choice, not do what is required, and get in? If there is not something I am unawere of. I think I should revisit the Adam and Eve story and some other stuff. If I remember correct, they were sent out of the Garden, never to return till they sought the kingdom with pure hearts, and the return is to heavens gates. So kind of where Eden is. Paraphrased and interpreted by myself. So our job is to rid us of those emotions that Adam and Eve got first, shame, fear, despair, etc. And we should get a childlike and innocent mind and heart again, which means reborn to me. I have never thought it was open to all in my life, even when I was an atheist.

 

[public hermit]

Since some version of human free will seems a promising route, I will post part of Adam's response. She argues that we have impaired freedom. And, in contrast to an Augustinian notion that we were perfect and fell, she takes a position she considers similar to that of Irenaeus, i.e. we began spiritually immature and grow to maturity (partly and sometimes not at all):


"By contrast, a realistic picture of human agency should recognize
the following: (a) We human beings start life ignorant, weak, and
helpless, psychologically so lacking in a self-concept as to be incapable
of choice. (b) We learn to "construct" a picture of the world,
ourselves, and other people only with difficulty over a long period of
time and under the extensive influence of other non-ideal choosers.
(c) Human development is the interactive product of human nature
and its environment, and from early on we humans are confronted
with problems that we cannot adequately grasp or cope with, and in
response to which we mount (without fully conscious calculation)
inefficient adaptational strategies. (d) Yet, the human psyche forms
habits in such a way that these reactive patterns, based as they are
on a child's inaccurate view of the world and its strategic options,
become entrenched in the individual's personality. (e) Typically, the
habits are unconsciously "acted out" for years, causing much suffering
to self and others before (if ever) they are recognized and undone
through a difficult and painful process of therapy and/or spiritual
formation. (f) Having thus begun immature, we arrive at
adulthood in a state of impaired freedom, as our childhood adaptational
strategies continue to distort our perceptions and behavior. (g)
We adults with impaired freedom are responsible for our choices,
actions, and even the character molded by our unconscious adaptational
strategies, in the sense that we are the agent causes of them. (h)
Our assessments of moral responsibility, praise, and blame cannot
afford to take this impairment into account, because we are not as
humans capable of organizing and regulating ourselves in that finetuned
a way. And so, except for the most severe cases of impairment,
we continue to hold ourselves responsible to one another.

Taking these estimates of human nature to heart, I draw two conclusions:
first, that such impaired adult human agency is no more
competent to be entrusted with its (individual or collective) eternal
destiny than two-year-old agency is to be allowed choices that could
result in its death or serious physical impairment; and second, that
the fact that the choices of such impaired agents come between the
divine creator of the environment and their infernal outcome no
more reduces divine responsibility for the damnation than two-year old
agency reduces the responsibility of the adult caretake~."

 

[Jesus is my Superhero]

If you have a contrite spirit and a humble attitude, like a little child, He will show you compassion. God is love and desires a relationship with his created servants.
We are admonished to choose between life and death in scriptures. Being on the outside looking in, is our own choosing.
We cannot choose our time of birth, nor the time of our natural death, but between these two events we must make many choices.

 

[public hermit]

Is capable, but as I understand it, not willing, if we do not free our hearts of hate, and pray to join heaven. We must cleanse our hearts to get it. How can we get the choice, not do what is required, and get in? If there is not something I am unawere of. I think I should revisit the Adam and Eve story and some other stuff. If I remember correct, they were sent out of the Garden, never to return till they sought the kingdom with pure hearts, and the return is to heavens gates. So kind of where Eden is. Paraphrased and interpreted by myself. So our job is to rid us of those emotions that Adam and Eve got first, shame, fear, despair, etc. And we should get a childlike and innocent mind and heart again, which means reborn to me. I have never thought it was open to all in my life, even when I was an atheist.

A lot of what you're saying sounds right. How could we enter heaven with hate in our hearts? Surely, we need changed hearts in order to do that. And, I agree, it seems it would take some effort on our part. Although, the scriptures seem pretty clear that it is God who gives us a new heart (replacing our "heart of stone with one of flesh"). I'm not going to pretend to know how to delineate the relationship between God's grace and our effort, though there must be one. But your notion about having the right kind of heart to enter heaven seems on point.

 

[public hermit]

If you have a contrite spirit and a humble attitude, like a little child, He will show you compassion. God is love and desires a relationship with his created servants.
We are admonished to choose between life and death in scriptures. Being on the outside looking in, is our own choosing.
We cannot choose our time of birth, nor the time of our natural death, but between these two events we must make many choices.

Do you think it is possible for God to bring about the appropriate contrite spirit and humble attitude needed for divine compassion? Or, is that solely a work achieved by human effort?

 

[ozso]

The corollary seems to be that God MUST force everyone into heaven, even those for whom being forced into heaven against their will would be a living hell. We are all forcibly predestined into heaven, even against our wills. Or we are all forcibly predestined to will to go to heaven. God has no respect for our choices in such a scenario.

We are forced to be born and to live in this world. There's no choice in that. Also there's no choice in when and how we die. (outside of suicide, but I'm not talking about that). So why must there be a choice regarding the afterlife?

 

[Sabertooth]

I'm not going to pretend to know how to delineate the relationship between God's grace and our effort, though there must be one.

Jesus said,
"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden,

and I will give you rest.​

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me,
for I am gentle and lowly in heart,

and you will find rest for your souls.​

For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” Matthew 11:28-30 NKJV

The "rest" and "ease" are grace, but His "yoke" is still an effort within that grace.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Marilyn McCord Adams, who was a philosopher and Episcopal priest, developed an argument to refute ECT (eternal conscious torment). Her argument is candidly appropriated from the logical problem of evil by J.L. Mackie.

She begins with two premises
G: God exists, and is essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good
H: Some created persons will be consigned to hell forever

The argument:
1. If God existed and were omnipotent, then God would be able to avoid H
2. If God existed and were omniscient, then God would know how to avoid H
3. If God existed and were perfectly good, then God would want to avoid H
Conclusion: If G; then not-H
(If God exists, and is essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good; then it is not the case that some created persons will be consigned to hell forever)

This is my first time seeing this argument, so I am curious what y'all think.

https://cpb-us-w2.wpmucdn.com/campu...l-A-Problem-of-Evil-for-Christians-pslyys.pdf

Marilyn McCord Adams - Wikipedia

It makes the false assumption that Omnipotent and Omniscient would be able to /know how to do something that is logically self-contradictory (eg God make a rock too big for him to pick up). If God has set hell as necessary for justice, which is intrinsically who he is, who are we to say it could have been done differently?

She also doesn't concern herself with the nature for sin, nor the use of sin in producing the Bride of Christ and God's ultimate glory, in her logic.

 

[public hermit]

Jesus said,
"Come to Me, all you who labor and are heavy laden,

and I will give you rest.​

Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me,
for I am gentle and lowly in heart,

and you will find rest for your souls.​

For My yoke is easy and My burden is light.” Matthew 11:28-30 NKJV

The "rest" and "ease" are grace, but His "yoke" is still an effort within that grace.

I take it Jesus is saying his way is easy and light. To be generous, kind, gracious, discerning, unaffected, obedient to God, etc. would be a much easier way of life....if only we could do it!! Are you telling me that living according to God's will is easy? If so, what is the need for grace? If we need grace, the way must not be that easy to fulfill, even if living that way is easy and light compared to a life of sin.

 

[Sabertooth]

Do you think it is possible for God to bring about the appropriate contrite spirit and humble attitude needed for divine compassion?

Not in every case. Not while leaving the "will" component of love intact.

 

[TedT]

e argument:
1. If God existed and were omnipotent, then God would be able to avoid H
2. If God existed and were omniscient, then God would know how to avoid H
3. If God existed and were perfectly good, then God would want to avoid H
Conclusion: If G; then not-H
(If God exists, and is essentially omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly good; then it is not the case that some created persons will be consigned to hell forever)

This is my first time seeing this argument, so I am curious what y'all think.

Of course He could have avoided evil and hell but at the cost of not being able to fulfil HIS purpose for creation. HIS purpose constrained HIM from using HIS divine attributes to force us into Ms Adam's mold.

ImCo,
all people created in HIS image, ie, able to be a suitable Bride for HIM, had to have been created with a free will (NOT coerced or forced to choose any particular option available over the others) with an equal ability and opportunity to put their faith in HIM and HIS gospel OR to put their faith in the rejection of HIS claims and the gospel as lies. Such free will decisions had to be sacrosanct or they are not free at all.

The whole story of HIS relationship with mankind ends with the heavenly marriage of the church with the Lamb. To me, this suggests most strongly that this marriage is the culmination of HIS purpose for our creation.

A true marriage cannot be forced...GOD does not want a Stepford Wife. A true marriage MUST be based upon the free acceptance of the bride to the marriage proposal. True love cannot be forced but must be nurtured and grow .

Therefore to fulfill HIS purpose for us we needed to have a true free will (not fake like on earth). It is axiomatic that a free will must have been able to reject YHWH as a husband and able to repudiate the marriage.

Such a free will repudiation of YHWH as not good husband material must have had a reason and if we listen to the reprobate, they tells us they think HE is a liar and a false god, motivated by a perverse psychopathy to seek false worship.

Such a decision made by faith, an unproven hope, would make them eternally evil because
- they were immediately enslaved by the addictive power of evil,
- they had no power to break their enslavement and repent,
- they had repudiated the only power that could help them repent by their sacrosanct free will decision for HIM to not interfere with them at all.

Given that the heavenly marriage was accessible only by a free will decision to accept the proposal, being forced to bow to HIM by HIS power forcing them to repent or by the proof of hell IS NOT part of the entry ticket in the least.

Since a little leaven, sin, leavens, corrupts, the whole lump, person, or community, HIS heavenly community had to be sequestered from the pernicious evil of these eternally evil ones so it is an absolute necessity that they be banished to the outer darkness.

Therefore, while Ms Adams might know a little bit about logic and a bit about the nature of GOD, she knows nothing of HIM personally and HIS purposes which resolves her contentions.

YES HE had the power to create a creation free of evil, but to do so meant HE had to deny us a free will, the source of all evil, which would make it impossible for HIM to have a true marriage based on a true love, with us.

 

[Sabertooth]

Are you telling me that living according to God's will is easy?

No. I am saying that it is easier to surrender (and re-surrender, as needed) to Him, than it is to meet the "legal" standard necessary to get into Heaven.