Is Culpability and Eternal Punishment Coherent Under an Unrequested and Undesired Sin Nature - 30

The conjunction of an unrequested inherited disposition that makes universal transgression inevitable and eternal conscious torment is not made publicly coherent by a generic appeal to free will. Here coherence means a rationally connected account of culpability, sanction, and professed justice, not bare freedom from formal contradiction. Inevitability must first be specified: the claim that everyone eventually sins does not entail that every sinful act, or any named act, was unavoidable. Where inherited disorder prevents adequate ownership, reasons-responsiveness, or informed control, it weakens the culpable basis for condemnation. Where responsibility survives, finite earthly culpability still does not by itself justify punitive suffering without end. Continuing-sin and self-exclusion replies can make punishment conditional rather than irrevocable, but they must establish responsible rejection and proportionality at every stage instead of assuming that an endless actual history explains itself. Frankfurt-style objections block a simple could-not-do-otherwise argument; they do not supply the ownership or sanction principle the package needs. The result is a trilemma: weaken inherited inevitability, replace eternal conscious torment, or provide the missing control and proportionality premises. This conclusion targets one justificatory package. It does not disprove theism, every doctrine of original sin, every punishment, or every Christian view of final judgment.