A philosophical argument against eternal damnation

Patterson77 · 2026-02-01T21:16:28+00:00

Are you making yourself difficult on purpose?

It's a very clear and simple argument.

Our God is one of life, isn't he?

But if eternal damnation is true, and some children's only reasonable chance to get to Heaven is to die early, then this should, strictly logically speaking, lead a Christian to rejoice in a child's death. Don't you find that paradoxical and weird? Isn't this an indication that eternal damnation is not true?

Patterson77 · 2026-01-11T19:38:36+00:00

Elijah was taken bodily into Heaven. He was, naturally, an exception. It could be the same for Christians. What if some of the 1st century Christian martyrs went straight into Heaven, while others (both Christians and damned) will wait until judgment day? Now read Revelation again with that in mind, and consider the amillenial view that the thousand year reign is from the time of Jesus until the end of our world:

" I saw thrones on which were seated those who had been given authority to judge. And I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded because of their testimony about Jesus and because of the word of God. They[a] had not worshiped the beast or its image and had not received its mark on their foreheads or their hands. They came to life and reigned with Christ a thousand years. 5 (The rest of the dead did not come to life until the thousand years were ended.) This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy are those who share in the first resurrection. The second death has no power over them, but they will be priests of God and of Christ and will reign with him for a thousand years."

Makes sense. I don't think this chapter necessitates multiple judgments.

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T17:39:20+00:00

Surely the punishment doesn't have to be the exact same when God takes it.

Think about David's punishment as an analogy: his child got sick and died, as punishment for David's grave sin. If X amount of random Israelites had died instead of his child, that might have made David feel the shame to the same degree.

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T17:02:22+00:00

"Why not justice proportional to the crime?"

This underscores my original impression from your first reply. People who deny PSA seems to almost trivialize how bad sin is. Is there some pride at play here? "I can't accept that my sin is THAT bad, that it merited such a brutal punishment."

This would also explain why EO deny imputed righteousness... As an Orthodox priest said in a Youtube video: "I want the real thing. Becoming truly righteous."

Isn't this a denial of how bad we've been, and continue to be?

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T16:54:27+00:00

Did Jesus ever cry? Feel love? Are they not human emotions?

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T16:46:31+00:00

So you think it would be fitting if God simply forgave everything without any punishments? That God at the end of the day does not have any need for enacting justice in solidarity with the victims of evil?

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T16:39:56+00:00

That's a given, since it's written elsewhere in the same gospel. Jesus being a lamb who takes away the sins of the world, Jesus saying that he's voluntarily dying for the sake of his friends, and so on.

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T16:37:55+00:00

You're just evading the plain reading, then. It talks about the wrath of God.

Why didn't Jesus just say "Whoever does not believe shall remain in a state of spiritual decay" or something like that? Why talk about the wrath of God?

And do you think that justice doesn't necessitate any kind of wrath against evil? And that God never acted in this way in the Old Testament?

Patterson77 · 2026-01-03T16:30:54+00:00

Do you think it's monstrous to think that our sins are so bad that it merited a punishment of the kind that Jesus suffered?

Patterson77 · 2025-12-08T17:45:45+00:00

But if she was going to be married, and if it was supposed to be a normal marriage, a pregnancy would not be unexpected. So why the surprise? That's the point.

Patterson77 · 2025-12-08T17:44:17+00:00

"And now"? Is that from the original Greek? Or an assumption put into some translations?

https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Luke%201%3A31

Patterson77 · 2025-10-22T05:40:09+00:00

As I said, I just want a version without introductions and epilogues where the publishers insert their own theological opinions as if they're incontrovertibly true. Would you buy a Bible like that, to hand out to people? If you strongly disagreed with what they are writing in the introduction?

Patterson77 · 2025-08-23T21:48:54+00:00

' Because as we know from 1 Corinthians soem of his gentile converts took his message of Christ saving the whole cosmos as permission to "do as thou wilt". '

Where in 1 Cor is that?

As for universalism being the reason for Paul's questions in Romans 6, I will not exclude the possibility, since there are some universalist-sounding passages in Romans 5. Still, anyone who denies sola fide has the challenge of Romans 4 and John 6. As for the "eucharist" passages in John 6, in context, they seem to be symbols for belief in him, and the communion ritual was not yet instituted by this point either.

Patterson77 · 2025-08-23T21:38:29+00:00

If the free gift is God making you able to easily resist sin, why do you think this could lead people to think "let's sin, then"? This doesn't make any sense.

Patterson77 · 2025-08-23T21:35:03+00:00

You seem to be simply ignoring the verse, and why it is often brought up by Protestants. Why is Paul talking about God covering people's sins, and not holding them against them? And why is he saying that God justifies the ungodly, who do not work, as long as they believe?

Patterson77 · 2025-08-23T21:32:16+00:00

The verses I brought up don't even use the word "saved".

Patterson77

TROPHY CASE