"For justice to be done, I would suggest that god be send to hell, simply for creating creatures capable of eternal damnation. God didn't stop there, of course; he drew up an arbitrary list of prohibited actions, knowing full well their considerable overlap with the impulses and failings he had incorporated into his chosen people."

I absolutely agree with the concept, except I don't think we should blame "God" for drawing up "an arbitrary list of prohibited actions"--cause I don't think "God" wrote the Bible; humans did. And you know how humans love torturing other humans! I could never believe in a God like the one in the Old Testament, who could be less forgiving of the "sins" of his created beings than I myself would be...and me, just a mere human!

Also, I think psychopaths would be condemned to eternal purgatory, because it is impossible for them to feel "sincere apology."

Since it is possible that the person will repent at the end of each cycle, and since all things that are possible will happen eventually given an unlimited amount of time, no one will be condemned to suffer forever.

(1) Is it really possible that psychopaths would, or could, repent - given that you set the condition to be "sincere apology"?

(2) Your "limit proof" may be fallacious. You set up us humans with free-willed souls - and I assume that means we are not (a) random, (b) deterministic, or (c) an information-combination of these, but rather some kind of inexplicable, irreducible, metaphysical "excluded middle" between random and deterministic that does not rely upon mechanistic integration. Given that, it is dubious to apply any sort of probabilistic or otherwise formal theorem about infinities to "souls."

Given infinite time, even the limitless diversity possible within this conception of the afterlife could grow monotonous, and Heaven would not be Heaven in that case.

This seems too subjective of a prediction. How do you know how the "limitless diversity possible" could play out? At any rate, I have some potential solutions to add in a bit, after some problems.

Paradox in Metaphysical Time: You propose (a) all redeemed souls will begin existence in Heaven at one time, and (b) the afterlife gods can create new, legitimate souls that will likewise be received into Heaven. Doesn't that create a supervenient time paradox? Imagine: my creator right now could be speaking with my afterlife self, getting recommendations on how to compose the world I'm in! Plus, if people can reincarnate back onto Earth, then do the afterlife- pre-incarnate and re-incarnate versions of people get to intermingle?

Difficulty with Social Happiness: I think it is obvious to note that, us being social beings, we are very much dependent upon interaction with each other as a means of deriving happiness. Either this instinct gets dwindled, or we still probably suffer to some degree for all of our little differences. Imagine: a woman's ex-boyfriend desires intimacy with her, but understands that his love is unrequited and wishes not to hurt this woman, so keeps to himself and diminishes his capacity for contentment. (You did say loneliness and grief seem inappropriate for Heaven.)

Difficulty with Communication: In Heaven, how would we communicate with each other? Could we receive massive amounts of thought-communication at once and process it? Direct-revelation-message-boards with an infinity of members? Could I bug you if you were having uninterrupted fun inside some world you created?

The following two ideas can be thought of as potential solutions to the problem of boredom.

Spontaneous Phenomenality: Basically, I would want the power to literally create things that were previously unimaginable to me. I could see new colors, feel new textures, hear new sounds, smell new odors, taste new foods, control different bodies (bodies in n-dimensional universes!), feel new emotions, or even create entirely new types of sensations and experiences. Consciousness could be expanded indefinitely, beyond all known categories that define the mind as we know it.

Soul/Being-Revision: This is a particularly dangerous idea. Essentially, you have the power to change your own nature or state. You can put yourself into states resembling that in dreams or on drugs. You can make yourself happy or sad. You may also make yourself more intelligent, more creative, more compassionate, more independent, etc. You can even alter your own memory temporarily so as to re-experience moments in a life. In fact, you could do much more. You could copy your own soul, or combine it with another person's. (Does this even make sense?) If want be, you could give yourself omniscience (of all analytic truths so as not to contradict free will), and be in any superposition of mental states you want, even break free of temporality and become a timeless god.

All in all, attempting to design afterlife is a very rewarding philosophical exercise. In nearly every possible avenue one comes across issues revolving around metaphysics and psychology that seem impossible to fix all at once.

Dunno if anyone brought that up previously (doesn't look like it) but it's an interesting point. Seeing as we're dealing with a fantasy situation we can just employ the usual handwaving and invoke concepts like heaven existing outside time and all that sort of thing. It's just that your formulation seems to imply some kind of traditional temporal order to things.

Fun read though. Another thing - I know everyone ends up in heaven and has sincerely repented but a lot of people would still be a tad angry at Hitler, Stalin, etc. Would we be allowed to stick "Kick Me" signs on their backs and call them names at least?

Oh, and I like the zombie idea. Heaven definitely has zombies (other than JC) :-)

A bit late, but so be it. In the name of the Party, amen.

You are using "psychology" to give yourself a false sense of security.

As it happens, I think you're using your religious beliefs for the exact same purpose.

When you need to resort to "snarkiness", you are unable to truthfully justify your stance, so you adopt a tone which you think will hide the fact that you have no valid comeback.

My valid comeback is that you have no valid evidence whatsoever to support your views. It was true then and it is still true, and nothing more need be said.

LOL! I don't believe I've ever seen you be so snarky! Thank you!

I don't know about yourself, but the people who have committed evil, do not need purgatory to explain why they were wrong. They KNEW when they committed the act, and their soul WANTED to commit the evil on so many levels.

Just wanted to add, give sinners half a chance, and no matter how much rehabilitation they are given in purgatory, they will continue sinning…

It must be nice to be able to make confident statements about the psychology of others on the basis of no evidence whatsoever.