Customer Reviews

Hell: The Logic of Damnation (Library of Religious Philosophy)

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Hell: The Logic of Damnation addresses the basic question as to whether the traditional Christian doctrine of hell can still be maintained with intellectual vigor. For Walls, the answer is affirmative, but he refuses to rely on cliche and convention to support his claim. Rather, the scholarly treatment of the topic is logical, balanced, and coherent, drawing from a variety of sources, both historical and contemporary.

Walls lays out the main versions of the doctrine and evaluates their ability to address the main concern, namely, whether a doctrine of hell can be consistent with: 1) divine freedom, 2) human freedom, and 3) divine goodness. In this regard, he examines the issue in light of divine attributes and human nature. In the process, he gives a philosophical critique of Calvinistic predestination, offering Molinism as a viable alternative. Overall, he lays out a careful analysis that makes no assumptions, yet remains faithful to Scripture. His conclusions are not dogmatic, and he remains focused on providing a philosophical basis for the rudimentary elements of the doctrine.

This is essential reading for theologians, clergy, and laity with an academic interest in the subject.

Here are links to my books:

Maturity of Belief: Critically Assessing Religious Faith

Salvaging Wesley's Agenda: A New Paradigm for Wesleyan Virtue Ethics (Princeton Theological Monograph)

I gave this book a 4 star rating as it is a very interesting and highly readable book. Walls, being an Arminian, often turns the discussion from hell into a refutation of Calvinism. I had no issue with this as it did pertain to the Calvinist view of damnation but I can see how this book would be highly problematic for a committed Calvinist looking to understand the logic of damnation and not hear about how their theology fails at so many key points. I must say Walls is very open minded about alternative views of hell, and gives credit to many theologians when he deems their arguments compelling. Sometimes this book wanders a little too much, which is certainly common among philosophers, but all in all it is a very interesting look at the doctrine of hell. Walls does a good job at maintaining an even-handed, non-dogmatic approach the whole way through the book. If I were a fundamentalist, I would probably put this book down after the first chapter, but those with a reasonably open mind will thoroughly enjoy this book.

Walls does an excellent job in this book in creating a coherent account of how an eternal Hell could obtain and still preserve (1) Human freedom, (2) divine foreknowledge, and (3) God's goodness. Although the account given by Walls is coherent, it needs to be developed a lot more from a biblical perspective. His account basically ends in a kind of modified Molinism. In Walls account, the only way that molinism could truly preserve 1-3 noted above, it would need to incorporate some kind of purgatory. From a philosophical perspective, I must say, this book is pretty awesome; however, the fact that I am not Catholic, or have ever read any work on the reasoning from the scriptures to a notion of purgatory makes it difficult for me to accept (not that there arent any such written works), and it would of just been nice if Walls would of given a little more background as far as that is concerned. Either way, it has encouraged me to study catholic theology which, in the end, can only lead to productivity, and a less ignorant/dogmatic understanding of scripture. Another point of concern which, to Walls credit, he acknowledges is the topic of, whether or not, counterfactuals of freedom can be true. Oh yea, and if your a calvinist, or just an ignorant individual, who believes that any doctrine that doesnt line up with what you believe is false, then this book definitely will not sit well. Either way, Calvinism is nothing more than the result of poor philosophy. Ill tell you one thing, at the day of judgement, the one thing I do not want to be found guilty of is for indicting God on his goodness. If in the end calvinians are going to do nothing more than just allude to mystery, then why not just move the mystery somewhere else, somewhere far away from Gods goodness, like, I dont know, perhaps, the mystery of how purgatory could obtain even though (According to you) it doesnt seem to be supported by scripture, or the mystery of how prophecy is possible if open theism is true. These are mysteries I would much rather not be able to explain, than the mystery of how God can and cannot be the author of sin, and ultimately, the author of our condemnation. I am not saying I buy into purgatory or open theism, however, what I am saying is that we should try a little harder to work through scripture, rather than, try as hard as some of us do to make scripture fit our desired systems. Blessings.

The book may indeed be 5 star worthy, but it is very confusing to me. I get the sense the author is defending the "reason" that there must be a hell, if indeed we know there is a heaven. Maybe I need to try to read this book when there is total quite and not the noise of kids, husbands and TV in the background. There are paragraphs where I have read over and over and still not grasping it.But it was a highly recommended book, so I will keep trying.If and when I do understand it I will edit my rating. LOL :)