We discuss the philosophical problems attendant to the justice of eternal punishments in Hell, particularly those portrayed in Dante’s Inferno. We conclude that, under Dante’s description, a unique version of the problem of Hell (and Heaven) can be posed.

The Problem of Suffering (PoS) claims that there is a tension between the existence of a perfect God and suffering. The Problem of Hell (PoH) is a version of PoS which claims that a perfect God would lack morally sufficient reasons to allow individuals to be eternally damned to Hell. A few traditional solutions have been developed to PoH, but each of them is problematic. As such, if there is a solu­tion to PoH that is resistant to these problems, then (...) it deserves our attention. In this paper, I develop precisely such a solution. I call this the Unpopulated Hell View (UHV), which claims that Hell exists as a place where eternal damnation could take place, although it never does. First, I explain how UHV solves PoH. Next, I develop four objections against UHV and defend UHV against them. I argue that, although some of these objections do more damage to UHV than others, UHV has satisfying responses to all of them. Ultimately, I conclude that UHV merits consideration as a novel solution to PoH because it is less problematic than the traditional ones. (shrink)

According to Michael Almeida, reflections on free will and possibility can be used to show that the existence of an Anselmian God is compatible with the existence of evil. These arguments depend on the assumption that an agent can be free with respect to an action only if it is possible that that agent performs that action. Although this principle enjoys some intuitive support, I argue that Anselmianism undermines these intuitions by introducing impossible options. If Anselmianism is true, I argue, (...) then both God and creatures may be free to do the impossible. (shrink)

Benjamin Matheson has recently critiqued the escapist account of hell that we have defended. In this paper we respond to Matheson. Building on some of our work in defense of escapism that Matheson does not discuss we show that the threat posed by Matheson’s critique is chimerical. We begin by summarizing our escapist theory of hell. Next, we summarize both Matheson’s central thesis and the main arguments offered in its defense. We then respond to those arguments.

While most discussions in natural theology focus on the existence and nature of God, recently the axiological implications of theism have been taken up by such authors as Kahane, Kraay and Dragos, Davis, McLean, Penner and Lougheed, and Penner. Rather than asking whether God exists, they ask whether God’s existence would be a good thing or a bad thing. That general question breaks down into more precise sub-questions, with a wide variety of possible positions resulting. Here, I argue that one (...) of these positions is possibly true, and that this possibility provides for a new defence against one of the most prominent arguments for atheism in the current literature: the problem of divine hiddenness. (shrink)

براساس آموزه‌هایِ دینیِ ادیان بزرگ توحیدی، خداوند در جهان دیگر و در روز داوری بر اعمال و نیات همگان داوری خواهد کرد و این داوری عادلانه است. او به هر عملی، حتی کوچک‌ترین آن‌ها، رسیدگی خواهد کرد و جزای همگان را خواهد داد و از جمله، برخی گناهکاران را به عذاب جاویدان محکوم خواهد کرد. در مورد این آموزة دینی دست‌کم دو اشکال مهم طرح شده است: 1. عذاب جاویدان با عدالت الهی ناسازگار است؛ 2. عذاب جاویدان با عشق الهی (...) ناسازگار است. متفکرانی چون آنسلم و جاناتان ادواردز سعی کرده‌اند سازگاری عذاب جاویدان با عدالت خدا را نشان دهند و آکویناس هم بر سازگاری عذاب جاویدان و عشق الهی استدلال کرده است. در سنت اسلامی نیز تلاش‌هایی برای طرح بحث از امکان سازگاری عذاب جاویدان اخروی با عدل الهی شده است که از نمونه‌های برجسته و متأخر آن دیدگاه مرتضی مطهری در عدل الهی است. در این مقاله، استدلال می‌کنم که گرچه همة این استدلال‌ها میزان قوت و ضعفشان یکسان نیست، همة آن‌ها در پاسخ اخلاقی موجه به اشکال‌های طرح‌شده، ناکام می‌مانند. (shrink)

In the first part of the paper, I argue that Christians should incorporate the theory of reincarnation into their belief system. The problem of the apparent disproportion between finite human sin and infinite punishment in Hell becomes far more tractable against the background of reincarnation. In the second part of the paper, I address and answer three objections that may be raised against a Christian theory of reincarnation. The first objection is based on the role of memory in identity, the (...) second points to the essential unity of body and soul, and the third revolves around the suggestion that living multiple lives may more easily lead to damnation than to salvation. (shrink)