جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « eternal punishment » در نشریات گروه « فلسفه و کلام »

Paying attention to the verses and narrations shows that although in some parts of the worlds after death, the way of repentance is briefly closed; But in other stages of the hereafter, this chapter of God's mercy is still open; and people suffering from punishment can truly repent; rather, God, with His vast mercy, provides arrangements in the worlds after death so that the guilty people who did not become believers in the world can consciously and voluntarily repent and become believers, and in this way, they can even be freed from the eternal punishment of hell. Verses 85 to 87 of surah Maryam and verses 22 to 24 of surah Furqan are among the verses that indicate the permissibility or the occurrence of repentance in life after death. And among the verses that indicate the end of the punishment and the removal of the eternal punishment, there are the verses that indicate that the punishment for the wrongdoings of the criminals in the resurrection is exactly the same as their practical or belief sins that were committed in the world; because the requirement of the unity of sin and punishment is that by repenting of this practical or belief sin, the punishment that is the same as sin is also removed.

According to the problem of hell, the traditional doctrine of Hell, Hell as a retributive place for eternal punishment_ is inconsistent with some certain attributes of God such as just and loving. Proponents of escapism_ a version of issuantism_ contend that with revising in the traditional view of Hell, they have resources to provide a response to this problem. Firstly, escapists dispense with any understanding of Hell as retribution for crimes, and secondly, residing in Hell is not necessarily eternal. Although Hell can exist permanently and even some persons reside there, all the residents of Hell can constantly be provided with the opportunities to leave Hell and be in comm:union: with God. Yet, there are some objections, including confusion between the doctrine of Purgatory and the doctrine of Hell, leading to defending from a version of universalism which is rejected by the mainstream of Christian theology, treating Heaven and Hell asymmetrically, that pose serious challenges to escapism. Given these objections, it seems that escapists  (Buckareff and Plug), firstly, are not able to respond to some of the most important criticisms of escapism, and secondly, they cannot draw a clear line between this view and similar views in the tradition of Christian theology.

According to the doctrines of great monotheistic religions, God will fairly judge on the deeds and intentions of all people on the Day of Judgment in hereafter. He will reckon all deeds, even the tiniest ones, will do justice to everyone according to their acts, and will condemn some sinners to eternal punishment. There seems to be at least two important problems about this religious doctrine: First, the eternal punishment is inconsistent with divine justice; second, eternal punishment is inconsistent with divine love. Theologians and thinkers such as Anselm and Jonathan Edwards have tried to prove the consistency of eternal punishment with divine justice. Aquinas has also provided some arguments for the consistency of divine love with eternal punishment. There have also been endeavors in Islamic tradition to argue that the eternal punishment is consistent with divine justice; among the main and recent examples is Motahhari’s view in his book "Adl-e Elahi" (Divine Justice). Examining and comparing the main arguments presented against the two mentioned problems, the present paper argues that all of these arguments fail to provide justified moral answers to the problems, though they differ in terms of their merits and demerits.