Sophia 50 (1):221-232 (2011)
|Abstract||Ted Sider argues that a binary afterlife is inconsistent with a proportionally just God because no just criterion for placing persons in such an afterlife exists. I provide a possible account whereby God can remain proportionally just and allow a binary afterlife. On my account, there is some maximum amount of people God can allow into Heaven without sacrificing some greater good. God gives to all people at least their due but chooses to allow some who do not deserve Heaven to enter out of grace. Although this model implies a precise cutoff between those who enter Heaven and those who do not, I have argued that there is a precise point where God best serves justice and some greater good. Although God’s actions may appear arbitrary and ‘whimsically generous,’ it is merely because we are ignorant of the precise cutoff point that best serves his purposes|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Charles Billingsley (2009). God Laughs: And Other Surprising Things You Never Knew About Him. Regal Books.
Marta Campdelacreu (2010). Naturalness, Vagueness, and Sortals. Metaphysica 11 (1):79-91.
Nikk Effingham (2009). Universalism, Vagueness and Supersubstantivalism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):35 – 42.
Kenneth Einar Himma (2003). Eternally Incorrigible: The Continuing-Sin Response to the Proportionality Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 39 (1):61-78.
Ted Poston & Trent Dougherty (2008). Hell and Vagueness: Reply to Sider. Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):322-328.
Andrei A. Buckareff & Allen Plug (2005). Escaping Hell: Divine Motivation and the Problem of Hell. Religious Studies 41 (1):39-54.
Ted Poston (2008). Hell, Vagueness, and Justice. Faith and Philosophy 25 (3):322-328.
Theodore Sider (2002). ``Hell and Vagueness&Quot. Faith and Philosophy 19 (1):58--68.
Added to index2009-08-17
Total downloads19 ( #64,458 of 550,917 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 550,917 )
How can I increase my downloads?