Martinus: Livets Bog, vol. 3, sect. 894

894. Why should these beings be tormented "eternally"? If they can never ever become better, and the value of their torment as a "deterrent" to other living beings also gives, as we have seen, no results, why not annihilate these beings altogether? If there was once a time when they did not exist but, according to ecclesiastical Christianity, came into being at the point of conception in their mother's womb, can they not just as well also be destroyed? That must surely be more loving. As the Providence of this Christianity is said to be almighty and all-knowing, it is within its power to be able to carry out such an act. But nevertheless these beings, without it serving any purpose whatsoever, indeed without it even being a deterrent to others, are to be tormented in all eternity. If Providence is able to find pleasure in this, it must be perverse. And if it cannot, it must be unhappy, and at the same time it is certainly not almighty, for if it were it would not create this unhappy state for itself, especially as it serves no purpose whatsoever. Does one imagine that one can base a culture of love, and consequently a lasting peace on Earth, on an image of God or a world picture, the logical analyses of which has such consequences? Does one imagine that the world redeemer had such an image, or such a view, of his heavenly father? Did he not say that he and the Father were one? Have you ever seen the world redeemer occupied with anything other than that "it is more blessed to give than to receive"? Was not his life one great sacrifice for the sake of human beings? Did he not say that he had not come to be served, but to serve? Did he not say that when one is smitten on one cheek, one should turn the other also? Did he not love his neighbour just as much as himself? Did he not forgive his enemies and executioners, exhorting others to do the same? Did he not say about these enemies and executioners that they did not know what they were doing? Does not his entire way of being express the very culmination of the contrast to the way of being demonstrated above, which Providence would have to have in order to be the originator of the phenomenon of torture described as "everlasting hell"? But if he could feel such love for ordinary earthly executioners or criminals, what must he not feel for the unfortunate and chronically helpless souls in "everlasting hell"? Does one not imagine that he had a completely different view of the Godhead and "hell" – one that was purer, more loving and more intellectual – than the one demonstrated by the ecclesiastical Christian view of these phenomena, and which we have been dealing with here? If this were not the case, his being one with the Father would be a total impossibility. A being that loves everything and everybody as itself cannot be one with a godhead that, without any particular purpose, produces beings or gives them life in order to allow them to be tormented for all eternity.