Reinhard von Richter

In this article Reinhard von Richter investigates the existential dilemmas arising from the literal adoption of salvific exclusivism and the doctrine of eternal torment, as upheld in traditional versions of Christianity and Islam: that is, that a Hell of eternal misery is the final destination of those who fail to achieve salvation. Through the analysis of various scenarios—which range from antinatalism and the dilemmas faced by physicians and politicians to family conflicts and extreme situations involving world leaders—the von Richter demonstrates how the attempt to minimize eternal suffering can lead to paradoxical and morally disturbing choices. This only underscores the horror and existential absurdity of these conceptions of reality.

In their traditional exclusivist, no-second-chance forms, Christianity and Islam preach as a final destination a Hell of eternal misery for those who fail to achieve salvation. Those who prefer not to subject others to eternal misery thus have no choice but to adopt antinatalism and condemn having children as a morally wrong act since this is exposes children the risk of eternal damnation. Opposition to having children, however, conflicts with passages from the respective sacred texts of these same religions imploring believers to procreate. But if Hell exists and a person has the subjective preference to minimize the risk of people, even hypothetical ones, going to Hell, they should adopt antinatalism and also wish for others not to have children. Any believer taking action to effect this result would thereby condemn himself to Hell.