Religious Studies 41 (1):39-54 (2005)
|Abstract||We argue that it is most rational for God, given God's character and policies, to adopt an open-door policy towards those in hell – making it possible for those in hell to escape. We argue that such a policy towards the residents of hell should issue from God's character and motivational states. In particular, God's parental love ought to motivate God to extend the provision for reconciliation with Him for an infinite amount of time.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Charles Seymour (2000). A Craigian Theodicy of Hell. Faith and Philosophy 17 (1):103-115.
Jonathan L. Kvanvig (1993). The Problem of Hell. New York: Oxford University Press.
Theodore Sider (2002). ``Hell and Vagueness&Quot. Faith and Philosophy 19 (1):58--68.
Kelly James Clark (2001). God is Great, God is Good: Medieval Conceptions of Divine Goodness and the Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 37 (1):15-31.
Charles Seymour (1997). On Choosing Hell. Religious Studies 33 (3):249-266.
Kenneth Einar Himma (2003). Eternally Incorrigible: The Continuing-Sin Response to the Proportionality Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 39 (1):61-78.
Wilko Van Holten (1999). Hell and the Goodness of God. Religious Studies 35 (1):37 - 55.
Andrei Buckareff & Allen Plug (2009). Escapism, Religious Luck, and Divine Reasons for Action. Religious Studies 45 (1):63-72.
Kyle Swan (2009). Hell and Divine Reasons for Action. Religious Studies 45 (1):51-61.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads98 ( #8,137 of 722,752 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #36,438 of 722,752 )
How can I increase my downloads?