Isn’t Hell necessary for the sake of justice?
No. This question begins with a false assumption: that Jesus believed in punishment in the sense of “an eye for an eye,” or what is sometimes called “justice.” In fact, Jesus rejected the concept of the need to hurt anyone, even if they had hurt someone else. He made no distinction between “justice” and “revenge.” Jesus viewed punishment, of any sort, as a tragic, endless, escalating cycle of people getting back at each, that never accomplished any good, but only resulted in even more suffering. Instead, he offered a new way of dealing with the human tendency to trespass against one another—repentance and forgiveness. Essentially, his view was that everyone hurts others and gets hurt by others, and the degree to which one commits these trespasses is often circumstantial (for example, most of us would never commit the act of murder, but were we to have lived in the shoes of those who do, we probably would because everyone commits murder in their heart to some degree). In other words, we
Related Questions
- Why isn’t the Inventory supported more substantially by other Antarctic Treaty countries? Why is public support necessary?
- Will the progressive fee affect costs in third world nations. Isn’t there a justice issue?
- What happens if the deal doesn’t tip (i.e., the minimum number of necessary buyers isn’t met)?
