What do the Abrahamic religions have to say about God’s nature and their respective notions of predestination and eternal punishment in Hell? How do these viewpoints compare and contrast with Deism’s perspective of God’s nature, predestination, and eternal Hell?

This is not to disrespect any faith, but to maintain continuity I will use the term “God” in place of “G-d”, “YHWH”, “Allah”, and “Creator” throughout. In order to establish a consistent frame of reference, the most prudent course of action is to develop a set of questions regarding God’s nature, predestination, and eternal Hell. They are as following:

(1) What is God’s nature and mankind’s relationship to Him?
(2) If God, in His omniscience, knew that a soul He was going to create would end up spending eternity in Hell; would He proceed to make that soul? If so, why?
(3) Would it be righteous and loving to create a soul predestined to suffer in Hell for eternity, or would it be unjust and malevolent?

Question (1) seeks to define who God is and the nature of humanity’s relationship with Him.
Question (2) probes each religion regarding the doctrine of eternal Hell and if that belief is held, asks for an explanation of God’s motives.
Question (3) serves to discern the moral nature of such conduct and pursues whether or not the moral teaching of a particular faith is congruent with that religion’s presentation of God’s nature.

JUDAISM

(1) Judaism teaches that God is one, indivisible, and cannot be described by attributes. It teaches that God is incorporeal, omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and eternal.

In the Torah, however, Genesis 18:20 intimates that God does not seem to be truly omniscient or omnipresent - “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”

Exodus 32:13 also implies that God has difficulty remembering His promises: “Remember your servants Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, to whom you swore by your own self: ‘I will make your descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and I will give your descendants all this land I promised them, and it will be their inheritance forever.’ Then the Lord relented and did not bring on His people the disaster He had threatened.”

Judaism teaches that God is both just and merciful in perfect balance. It teaches that God is holy and perfect, but also jealous. It teaches that God is “Avinu Malkeinu” - “our Father, our King.”

The Talmud teaches humans are created by three participants: mother and father for the physical body, and God who provides the soul (personality, intelligence). It teaches that humanity is God’s children, created in His image.

Judaism defines predestination differently than Christianity and Islam as there is no election to eternal life or hell. In Judaism, the concept of predestination is more synonymous with the concept of divine providence. The chief point of contention is over whether or not the future is the result of pure chance, or it’s the manifestation of God’s will. The Pharisees believed that not everything is divinely predestined, but that some things are dependent on man’s will. The Sadducees did not believe that God interfered in human affairs. The Essenes believed everything was divinely predestined.

(2) Early Judaism had no concept of Hell, eternal or otherwise. It also does not codify a specific doctrine of the afterlife, although Daniel 12:2 alludes that in the end times: “And rabbim of them that sleep in the admat aphar (dust of the ground) shall awake, some to Chayyei Olam (Everlasting Life), and some to reproaches (shames) and Dera’on Olam. (Everlasting Contempt, Abhorrence, Aversion, i.e., Everlasting Gehinnom)”

There are some popular teachings of Gehenna and Sheol, originally a sort of grave and today a sort of purgatory, but Judaism as a religion leaves this concept open to personal interpretation, unlike the doctrinal view of sin.

Judaism, therefore, does not teach that God would create a soul knowing it would suffer for eternity in Hell, which is congruent with its teaching of God’s nature and His relationship with humanity as a Father. It does portend that some people will suffer everlasting contempt for their actions, which again is congruent with its teaching of God’s nature.

(3) Judaism teaches that the universe is built on love.

Judaism teaches “Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself...” - Lev 19:18.

In some interpretations, it is said that being out of harmony with God’s will is punishment itself, but that the gates of teshuva are always open for those who want to repent and realign themselves with God’s will. This concept of eternal grace and just punishment is logically incompatible with the doctrine of eternal suffering in Hell.

In regards to the question at hand, Judaism confirms that it would be unjust and malevolent to create a soul knowing it was predestined to suffer in Hell for eternity. This is also copacetic with Judaism’s teaching of God’s nature and His relationship with humanity as a Father; for what loving father would allow their child to suffer forever with no just cause?

ISLAM

(1) Islam teaches tawhid, the oneness of God. It teaches that God is holy and supreme. It teaches that God has 99 attributes, some of which can be comprehended like “The Creator”, “The Prevailer”, “The Fashioner”; but God’s essence is ultimately incomprehensible due to the limitations of human understanding.

Islam teaches that man was not created in God’s image. Islam does not attempt to personify God, whereas Christianity and Judaism portray God as humanity’s Father. Islam teaches that God is all powerful, just, and He holds individuals accountable for their own actions. It teaches that God is omniscient, merciful, and the relationship with Him should be one of complete submission for humanity was created solely to worship Him.

Islam teaches that humanity has the free will to decide between right and wrong, but mankind cannot change its destiny as that is already predetermined. The concept of predestination creates, amongst some sects, a glaring point of contention. A universal resolution basically states that man has enough free will to discern right from wrong, so that God can justly hold individuals accountable for their actions, but not so much that humanity imposes on the will of God and becomes His partner.

(2) The concept of Hell, or Jahannam, in Islam, is accepted amongst all sects. There is some disagreement, amongst scholars and Muslims alike, as to whether or not Hell is an eternal destination for sinners. The prevailing view, which is well supported by the Quran, is that Hell is an eternal destination, but there are different levels of suffering in Hell that correspond justly to the sins and the extent of the disbelief.

Maalik, the chief angel in charge of guarding Hell, was quoted by Muhammed as saying, “Indeed, you will remain.” This seems to indicate, quite clearly, that Hell is an eternal destination in Islamic doctrine.

To the question at hand; Islam teaches that God, who inscribed the future onto tablets, did indeed create souls He knew were predestined to spend eternity in Hell. Muslims explain God’s action as just because humans are His chattel, created only for worship, and He gives everyone the opportunity to submit to Him before the final judgement.

In all my research, however, Islam fails to explain why God, knowing a soul is predestined for eternal Hell, would even create it to begin with instead of sparing that soul eternal suffering by simply not creating it. Islam also fails to explain how if God is all-capable as they teach, why would He create souls for the purpose of worship knowing ahead of time those souls would never worship Him. Those souls would not serve God’s purpose for creation, so why create them anyways? Unless, God created souls for the purpose of suffering in Hell for eternity, which is in direct contradiction to Islam’s teaching of God’s nature.

(3) Islam teaches that God is righteous and loving, and by that standard, everything God does follows suit. Muslims believe that God creating souls knowing they would suffer in eternity for Hell must therefore be righteous and loving.

The logical paradox in Islam is created by Muslims asking the question, “Would it be righteous and loving for me to predestine someone to eternal torture, or would it be unjust and malevolent?” When comparing the same action from one’s own moral perspective of right and wrong, it becomes abundantly clear that it would be unjust to punish someone for finite crimes with an infinite punishment. If the punishment does not correspond precisely to the scope and evil intent (mens rea) of the crimes, it is logically impossible to be righteous and just. If the intended consequence of the punishment isn’t to correct the bad behavior and bring that soul into harmony with society again, then it can’t truly be loving. At some point, when the punishment exceeds the crimes, it simply becomes malevolent because the punishment ceases to serve a moral purpose.

To the question at hand, this paradox prevents Muslims from logically answering. In short, that act is unjust and malevolent for Muslims based on their understanding of Islamic teaching, but it’s righteous and loving for God to do it Himself.

CHRISTIANITY

(1) Christianity, although notably fractured today in comparison to its inception, teaches that God is humanity’s Father. Christians believe God is one, though there is dispute amongst some sects in regards to the concept of the trinity.

Christianity, like Judaism, teaches that God is omnipresent, omniscient, omnipotent, and eternal. The Bible simultaneously indicates, however, that God has problems remembering promises or knowing whether or not people’s claims are true. There is dispute amongst sects over whether or not God is corporeal, even though some simultaneously claim Jesus, who is a person of God in the trinity, indeed possessed a body.

Christianity teaches that God is both righteous and merciful in perfect balance. It teaches that God is also holy and independent. Christianity teaches that God created mankind to reflect His image, to share the eternity of Heaven with Him, and be stewards of creation.

Similar to Judaism and Islam, there is a schism between Christian sects in regards to the concept of predestination. Some sects decree that the human mind is not fit to comprehend it. Like Islam, a global resolution of various Christian beliefs leads one to conclude that man has enough free will to justly be held accountable, but not enough to impact God’s will.

(2) The concept of eternal Hell is contentious in Christianity. The Orthodox view is that Hell is the eternal torment of being separated from God because of man’s rejection, not a physical place. The Catholic and Protestant view of Hell is that it’s a physical place of eternal suffering, although some sects believe that after a while the soul is simply annihilated. Only a few sects seem to address the moral paradox of “predestination by a loving, righteous, and merciful God for eternal suffering” by completely rejecting the doctrine of eternal Hell. This in turn creates another paradox, for if they are not at risk of eternal Hell and will be punished in just accordance to their sins and reconciled to God, what do they need Jesus for?

In regards to the question at hand, the overwhelming majority of Christians believe that rejection of Christ will lead to eternal suffering (either in physical Hell and/or emotional Hell), and they believe God has foreknowledge of this when He creates a soul, but He proceeds anyway. As to why God would do this, I have not been able to attain an answer from any theologian from any Christian sect, nor have I been able to posit a rational theory from my personal studies. The nature of God, as taught by Christianity, is not congruent with the concept of eternal suffering. The Christian reasons for the creation of mankind (to reflect God’s image, share in the eternity of Heaven, and be stewards of His creation) are also not congruent with “eternal suffering in/of Hell”, as a soul in/of Hell for eternity would not be able to fulfill any of those purposes.

In effect, a logical Mexican stand-off has been set up between the sacrifice of Christ, a loving and righteous God, and eternal suffering in/of Hell. If there is no eternal Hell, and people are punished for their sins in righteous accord with justice and the loving intention of reconciliation with God, then there is no need for Christ’s sacrifice. If there is eternal suffering in Hell and God creates souls knowing they are predestined for it, then God can not be truly loving and righteous because eternal torment is not congruent with righteousness or love. If God is not righteous and loving, then why did He sacrifice His son Jesus Christ to reconcile believers? If Jesus was not sent by God to be sacrificed, then who was that guy and why was he telling people that the only way to the Father was through him?

(3) As with Muslims, a logical paradox is set up for Christians by asking the question “Would it be righteous and loving for me to predestine someone to eternal torture, or would it be unjust and malevolent?”

When comparing the same action from Christian’s own moral perspective of right and wrong, it becomes abundantly clear that it would be wrong to punish someone for finite crimes with an infinite punishment. Christianity teaches mercy, and while the annihilationist theory in Christianity certainly takes into account terminating someone’s suffering, the predominant view is that there is no mercy in eternal Hell.

To the question at hand, this paradox prevents Christians from logically answering as well. In short, that act is unjust, cold-hearted, and malevolent for Christians based on their understanding of Christian teachings, but it’s righteous and loving for God to do it Himself. Do as He says, not as He does, and do not question why.

Ultimately this issue has fomented a tremendous schism in the Christian faith as many believers have attempted to reconcile this paradox by altering their views of eternal hell and predestination to remove any logical inconsistencies with their teaching of God’s nature. The very fact that a logical, unifying, clear-cut resolution has not been universally adopted is testament to the fact that Christianity can not reasonably amalgamate their religious doctrine with the nature of God they preach.

DEISM

Disclaimer: Deism is not technically a religion. It is rather a philosophical and scientific theory of God’s existence and nature. Instead of ensconcing a dogma and forcing facts or inconsistencies to fit, deism approaches God from a more scientific methodology. Questions are asked, a hypothesis is formed, it is tested, repeated by others, and the process repeats, sometimes to great dismay. As T.H. Huxley once said, “The great tragedy of science - the slaying of a beautiful hypothesis by an ugly fact.”

Deism is then a very broad and fluid discussion, a collaborative pursuit of God’s existence and nature, and as such, the results are a broad spectrum of opinions due to the variance of overall scientific and philosophical knowledge amongst constituents. If the objective truth can only be known with the absolute knowledge of all available facts, then the closest mankind can refine the perception of the truth is through the rigorous and objective pursuit of all facts and the dissemination thereof. As such, until that point, truth remains perception, not absolute. YMMV.

(1) Deism, both classical and modern, define God and humanity’s relationship thusly: “The true deist has but one Deity; and his religion consists in contemplating the power, wisdom, and benignity of the Deity in his works, and in endeavoring to imitate Him in every thing moral, scientifical, and mechanical.”- Thomas Paine

In Deism, reason is utilized to fathom the power and sovereignty of God. As Thomas Paine opined; “When at first thought, we think of a Creator, our ideas appear to us undefined and confused; but if we reason philosophically, those ideas can be easily arranged and simplified. ‘It is a Being whose power is equal to His will.’ Observe the nature of the will of man. It is of an infinite quality. We cannot conceive the possibility of limits to the will.”

Deists can not understand who God is to perfection. Paine summed this up succinctly; “Canst thou find out the Almighty to perfection? No; not only because the power and wisdom He has manifested in the structure of the creation that I behold is to me incomprehensible, but because even this manifestation, great as it is, is probably but a small display of that immensity of power and wisdom, by which millions of other worlds, to me invisible by their distance, were created and continue to exist.”

Deists do have a methodology for attempting to understand God’s nature. In the words of Thomas Paine; “Do we want to contemplate His power? We see it in the immensity of the Creation. Do we want to contemplate His wisdom? We see it in the unchangeable order by which the incomprehensible WHOLE is governed. Do we want to contemplate His munificence? We see it in the abundance with which He fills the earth. Do we want to contemplate His mercy? We see it in His not withholding that abundance even from the unthankful. In fine, do we want to know what God is? Search not written or printed books, but the Scriptures called the creation.”

If energy can neither be destroyed nor created, only transformed, then God must be incredibly powerful to generate the universe from His potential energy. The very fabric of creation is mostly empty space, it may even be a hologram, yet it seems to know when it is being observed.

It appears that God also has a profound sense of fairness and justice, for this act of seeking balance and harmony between forces can be observed in physics, thermodynamics, biology, the expansion rate of the universe, and in aspects of nature.

God has an incredible eye for symmetry in creation. His fingerprints are on everything. He has put into motion the reason for life, physical and spiritual. The most rational reason that God would create such an immense, bewildering, and living universe would be to share it with humanity, His children, to explore and understand.

In the Deist paradigm, trust in God is all that is required for eternal life. “I consider myself in the hands of my Creator, and that he will dispose of me after this life consistently with His justice and goodness. I leave all these matters to Him, as my Creator and friend, and I hold it to be presumption in man to make an article of faith as to what the Creator will do with us hereafter.” - Thomas Paine

Quantum physics may hold the answers as to how mankind’s consciousness exists apart from the physical body, providing eternal life.

Classical Deism held that man’s relationship with God was impersonal, that God put everything in motion but does not intervene directly except for divine providence. Some modern Deists theorize that the relationship with God is transpersonal, with God obeying the natural laws He set forth, but setting events in motion using the butterfly effect to manifest synchronicity. Upon closer inspection, these views are not mutually exclusive, for if God set everything in motion with the understanding of what He wanted to predestine, it is logical to presume that He set these interdictions in motion at the very onset of creation.

(2) In regards to the question at hand, Deists would answer the question using reason. As Thomas Paine wrote; “It is only by the exercise of reason that man can discover God. Take away that reason, and he would be incapable of understanding anything.”

Deism generally holds that; “As for morality, the knowledge of it exists in every man’s conscience.” - Paine

Logically, it would immoral for anyone to do something to anyone else that people know, in their conscience, is immoral to do to them. It stands to reason that God would not create a soul with the knowledge that it would suffer for eternity, because who would want to even be created if eternal torture and suffering was their final destiny?

While suffering is observed in creation, it is not eternal as this would be out of balance, inharmonious, and unjust. The nature of God, discerned from the Deist’s perspective as a benevolent, powerful, just, and creative entity, is incompatible with the concept of eternal torment. Would an artist create a painting they love for its eternal destruction? Would parents stand by if the child they loved was to be tortured indefinitely, or would they exhaust their resources to end it?

(3) Deism defines righteous as being in accord with moral law. Deism defines loving as affectionate towards someone else due to kinship or mutual ties.

Based on those definitions, in regards to the question on deck, it would not be affectionate for someone to create a soul that was predestined to suffer in Hell for eternity. The loving course of action would be to end the suffering, including preventing it by not creating that soul to begin with. The sadistic course of action would be to actualize the suffering of a soul for no other purpose than indefinite agony.

Natural law holds that people possess a right not to suffer for eternity if they so chose. It would be unjust for God, or anyone for that matter, to create a soul knowing that it was predestined to suffer for eternity in Hell, because it would violate that soul’s free will and natural right to self-termination.

SUMMARY

The concept of eternal suffering in Hell, God’s nature, and predestination (or preordainment) creates a significant point of contention amongst and between the Abrahamic religions. It serves, at all angles, to divide believers as they struggle to construct a rational and cognitive explanation that is congruent with the underlying religious concept of compassion, yet does not impinge on what they refuse to question and persist to believe in spite of reason.

Deism, by its nature, rejects any hypothesis which does not meet the standards of morality, logic, and reason. The concept of predestined eternal suffering in Hell is incongruent with the Deist’s understanding of morality and God’s nature. As such, that hypothesis is soundly rejected. Judaism shares this resolution with Deism from a doctrinal position. Judaism also shares the idea of leaving the notion of predestination to personal interpretation instead of religious doctrine.

Hopefully humanity will one day fully comprehend God’s system of justice. Until that day, it would be wise to continue asking questions and seeking answers in the spirit of philosophy, instead of the imposition of dogma which is a catalyst for fundamentalism. Otherwise, with all three Abrahamic religions and their cadre driving for the end times they believe are predestined to come, we are all predestined for suffering.

“It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime. He takes up the trade of a priest for the sake of gain, and, in order to qualify himself for that trade, he begins with a perjury. Can we conceive anything more destructive to morality than this?” - Thomas Paine