Justice

[McCulloch]

Justice is a topic many atheists either don't understand or willfully choose to run from it. The trouble with justice is that it requires an absolute perfect standard. Relativism is a common rabbit trail away from this perfect standard.

What is justice? Does justice require an absolutely perfect standard? Are atheists impeded in understanding what is just?

[wiploc]

This is one of the biggest philosophical problems I have with those sects of Christianity who teach the traditional views of Hell. Torturing people forever for following human nature is not justice.

Agreed. The people who invented eternal Hellfire were creating the worst of all possible worlds.

[ttruscott]

This is one of the biggest philosophical problems I have with those sects of Christianity who teach the traditional views of Hell. Torturing people forever for following human nature is not justice.

The word torture shows emotional bias as does claiming they are dam*ed for their human (ie created) nature... Only those with an incurably corrupted created nature go to hell.

Please consider: All this revolves around HIS goals for our creation:

1. To achieve HIS goal of true love and pure holiness, free will had to be allowed.

2. Allowing love had to allow evil, even eternal evil. Once someone, however unadvisedly, chose to be eternally evil, what should be done with them?

3. The heavenly experience will one of a full, loving and holy telepathic communion between GOD and all of creation throughout all of created reality for the rest of eternity.

Allowing even a hint or taint of sin into this heavenly link would slowly corrupt it like a computer virus let loose into a system. The Biblical analogy is that a little tiny bit of leaven will leaven the whole lump of bread and so must be assiduously removed.

Thus, unless HE wanted to repeat this earthly process of breaking the temporary addiction to evil in HIS Church due to the influence of the permanently evil over and over again for all eternity, the leaven of evil must be banished outside of the created reality in which the telepathic communion will be in effect.

Unless our created reality is infinite, it has an edge and the outer darkness Jesus told us about is probably out past that edge somewhere. It is a place of banishment, not torture for those who ignored the warnings about the awfulness of that non-place by deciding it was just the manipulations of a false god to enslave them under his thrall.

They saw more likelihood for eternal happiness in their independence from YHWH than in HIS claim to be able to provide the heavenly link. They made their choice. To fulfill HIS goal for the creation of every spirit in HIS image, HE MUST carry through with the warnings and banish them from created reality.

This is why HE can feel sad and fierce about the judgment at the same time as revealed in scripture.

Peace, Ted

[ttruscott]

The God on the cross solves the issue of Justice and Mercy by paying for our sins and therefore satisfying the requirement for justice. Justice is necessary.

Paying who for our sins? Did God pay himself when he went on the cross? How is someone without sin suffering justice? That is the exact opposite of justice. The suffering of Jesus does not fulfill any of the purposes of punishment.

By sinning, we incured a DEBT which He dealt with: Colossians 2:14 ...having canceled the charge of our legal indebtedness, which stood against us and condemned us; he has taken it away, nailing it to the cross.

If I borrow $10 from you but can't repay it and you forgive me the debt, you yourself must be out the $10, not me for I used its value. Forgiveness means I'm not faced with having to pay the debt anymore. We owed the debt of a death, not a punishment, not an experience of what it would be like for us to die, but just a death. Jesus, as part of the Divine Trinity who our debt was owed to, died on the cross and that cancelled our being faced with paying the debt.

[As for the meaning of death: it is one topic not settled in Christian doctrine but is complicated as one verse implies: Matthew 10:28 Do not be afraid of those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather, be afraid of the One who can destroy both soul and body in hell.]

So we have a God who is willing to lose and let you choose to not be his friend verses a god concept that allows evil for infinity. Hmmmm.

Why did create/allow to be born people who are evil for infinity? Hmmmm.

Although Calvinists do support this notion so I can't say it is non-Christian, they just say if HE did this so what - sit down and shut up. Others are content that HIS doing this is mollified by HIS offering the balm of Christ's death to alleviate HIS actions...

These rather inelegant suppositions are based upon the idea that the Holy GOD could and did create evil or at least people evil without their own choice in the matter because HE needed sinners to show HIS justice and power, peh!

I contend for a theology that GOD did not create evil people but did allow for them to be able to self create themselves as infinitely evil because to achieve HIS goal for our creation as sharing true love and pure holiness, free will had to be allowed or the goal could not be met.

In my reality GOD is holy:
- GOD did not need evil for HIS plan and did not create evil for any reason.
- All evil is creature created by their true free will.

In my reality WE had Free will:
- All spirits created in the image of GOD were created ingenuously innocent with the ability to make true free will decisions.

Peace, Ted

[help3434]

[Replying to post 13 by ttruscott]

Having someone suffer in a garden and on a cross doesn't pay anything. The whole concept of the atonement doesn't make any sense.

[Mr.Badham]

The best attempt at justice I have ever seen was a Native American (healing circle?). I can't remember the name exactly. It was where the person, who admitted to the crime, was sentenced by the victim of the crime.

It demanded that the person admit to the crime they committed. If they didn't it went to court.

If they admitted to the crime, the person they victimized was allowed to sentence them to a punishment. If they didn't agree to the punishment, it went to court.

The one I heard about was a girl who sentenced her assaulter to doing her chores which was cleaning a horse stable (for a month?) I don't remember. Apparently they became friends.

Justice is definitely subjective. So is morality.