24 Mar 13
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI think it does. Most Christians believe that everybody is guilty of sin, either their own or inherited from Adam (so called 'original sin', which even those that don't take genesis literally still seem to believe in, not sure how it works though).
Mmm....I could debate this, but in the context of this thread, I don't think it negates the point I was making.
They believe that everybody deserves the worst possible punishment (hell, of various descriptions).
They believe that God, through Jesus paid for our sin (don't ask me how that works, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense, but think of it as a fine in modern criminal justice systems, but where the Judge pays your fine out of his own pocket).
They then believe that those who accept having their fine paid, may get out of jail free. Although some then have some sort of minor punishment system thrown in, but at least the death penalty is removed.
So, the real question is, when a Judge pays the fine for a murderer on death row, is that Just?
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadSorry, I am still struggling to see your point. My original comment was only intended to say:
I think it does. Most Christians believe that everybody is guilty of sin, either their own or inherited from Adam (so called 'original sin', which even those that don't take genesis literally still seem to believe in, not sure how it works though).
They believe that everybody deserves the worst possible punishment (hell, of various descriptions).
They b ...[text shortened]... the real question is, when a Judge pays the fine for a murderer on death row, is that Just?
1) Every Christian I know believes in the earthly concept of proportionality of punishment, and that any earthly system that dispenses with this principle is unjust.
2) They happily dispense with this concept where their God is concerned.
You then raised the concept of a maximum penalty on our earthly system of justice, which I said did not negate the point I was making.
What you have said about the mechanics of salvation seems to me, if anything, to reinforce my point.
24 Mar 13
2 edits
Originally posted by checkbaiterWhy do you think having the power to create something gives you the right to destroy it?
Man o man! You Atheist's are thick headed!
Let me put it as plainly and as simply as I can.
God is holy. That means He does not even think evil. To try and approach a being like Him is impossible. His brilliance would shine right through you. It would reveal every evil intent, every evil thought, every sin you have ever committed. You would feel like ...[text shortened]... ll things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
NKJV
I created my son with my wife. I don't think you think we have the right to destroy him. You would call that immoral.
Why have a different view for God?
24 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by checkbaiterGod is holy. That means He does not even think evil. ...
Man o man! You Atheist's are thick headed!
Let me put it as plainly and as simply as I can.
God is holy. That means He does not even think evil. To try and approach a being like Him is impossible. His brilliance would shine right through you. It would reveal every evil intent, every evil thought, every sin you have ever committed. You would feel like ...[text shortened]... ll things to the church, 23 which is His body, the fullness of Him who fills all in all.
NKJV
Says who!? The Bible!?? ...and who says the Bible is right about this? "G"od!? and who even says that this "G"od even exists (let alone that he might have been lying!)!?? The Bible!???? ... (and so the cycle of circular reasoning continues)
He came up with a costly plan.
Since the price for sin is death, requiring bloodshed, He decided to sacrifice His beloved son, to redeem man to Himself.
Bit of a crap plan, would have expected better from your so called clever-clogs "G"od! ... But anyway, moving swiftly on, who decided the price for sin
(i.e. anything \"G\"od doesn\'t like \- regardless of whether it is morally good or bad)
is death?24 Mar 13
Originally posted by Rank outsiderWhat I am saying is that, no, they do not dispense of this concept. The punishment for all, is the maximum penalty, and as such is similar to the death penalty in worldly justice systems. The payment for your sins on earth whether you were a good little baby who died at one day old, or an old man who slaughtered millions, is the same: death/hell/separation from God/whatever the maximum is.
2) They happily dispense with this concept where their God is concerned.
What does not seem Just, and is what you are really rebelling against, is the concept of some people being let off. But this is separate from and therefore not in proportion to your crimes. You already tried and found guilty of your crimes. You have already been sentenced to the maximum punishment.
So, as I said, the question is whether or not a convicted murderer can justly be let off by a Judge, and is it fair if another convicted murderer is not. Remember that they committed crimes of equal magnitude and the Judge is not basing his decision based on the crimes committed.
24 Mar 13
The whole Christian justice system relies on two key concepts that I believe are faulty.
1. That crimes must be paid for - and that is justice - and that this justice is 'right'. I think this belief is based on a total misunderstanding of the human criminal justice system and its true purpose and origins.
2. That the payment can be made by somebody else - this is in total violation of even the human criminal justice system, and again shows a misunderstanding of its origins and purpose. But then its not really surprising as this particular perversion of justice has been used by the rich to hoodwink the poor throughout history.
24 Mar 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou say that Christians do not dispense with the concept of proportionality of punishment, then you say that they believe we are all, from birth, convicted of a crime for which the maximum penalty is assigned irrespective of actions/guilt etc.
What I am saying is that, no, they do not dispense of this concept. The punishment for all, is the maximum penalty, and as such is similar to the death penalty in worldly justice systems. The payment for your sins on earth whether you were a good little baby who died at one day old, or an old man who slaughtered millions, is the same: death/hell/separatio ...[text shortened]... rimes of equal magnitude and the Judge is not basing his decision based on the crimes committed.
That seems like the complete absence of proportionality to me.
The exact mechanics of redemption are somewhat beyond me, but the fact that some are allowed to achieve redemption subsequently may or may not be acceptable. So I am not rebelling against this per se.
However, the fact that redemption is not available to someone simply by virtue of being a Hindu, does not, it appears to me, strike at a lack of proportionality in the system, but rather the complete injustice of the system.
25 Mar 13
Originally posted by Rank outsiderOnce you reach the maximum penalty even in the human justice system, there is no proportionality. But I disagree that "any earthly system that dispenses with this principle is unjust." In fact almost all earthly systems dispense with this principle when it comes to the maximum penalty.
You say that Christians do not dispense with the concept of proportionality of punishment, then you say that they believe we are all, from birth, convicted of a crime for which the maximum penalty is assigned irrespective of actions/guilt etc.
That seems like the complete absence of proportionality to me.
The exact mechanics of redemption are somewhat beyond me, but the fact that some are allowed to achieve redemption subsequently may or may not be acceptable. So I am not rebelling against this per se.
However, the fact that redemption is not available to someone simply by virtue of being a Hindu, does not, it appears to me, strike at a lack of proportionality in the system, but rather the complete injustice of the system.
Yes, the system is unjust. But then what is justice? What purpose does the system serve anyway? I think this is at the heart of the matter, and I don't think any theist will be able to give you an answer. If they do, let me know because I have been badgering them about it for ages without success.
25 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by twhiteheadPerhaps if I had added the word 'completely' after dispense it would have made my meaning clearer.
In fact almost all earthly systems dispense with this principle when it comes to the maximum penalty.
I don't accept the view that having a maximum penalty means dispensing with the principle of proportionality. There are a host of reasons, pragmatic and otherwise, why a maximum penalty is necessary for the smooth operation of and for the sake of justice. For example, I know many people who think that the death penalty would be a proportionate punishment for certain crimes, but nonetheless oppose the death penalty.
This does not make this inconsistent with a principle of proportionality. Otherwise, you are saying that no justice system applies the principle of proportionality, as all justice systems have a maximum penalty.
What you might say is that, at one extreme end of the justice system, proportionality of punishment no longer applies. However, that is not the same thing as saying the principle of proportionality has been dispensed with as regards the system of justice looked at as a whole.
But the Christian system that is being espoused here is making all transgressions, including original sin, worthy of the same maximum penalty. This has truly 'dispensed with' the principle of proportionality.
25 Mar 13
3 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadYes, I agree, once you dispense completely with the principle of proportionality, then what you are left with is not justice in any meaningful sense of the word.
Yes, the system is unjust. But then what is justice? What purpose does the system serve anyway? I think this is at the heart of the matter, and I don't think any theist will be able to give you an answer. If they do, let me know because I have been badgering them about it for ages without success.
But then I never thought this was about justice at all. I thought it was about accepting the word of God, or else.
Though, having said that, the principle of proportionality was present to some degree in Mosaic Law as handed down by God in the OT, so it seems doubly odd that it is dispensed with completely in the afterlife.
25 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by Rank outsiderI don't think that most Christian believe that 'all transgressions' are necessarily worthy of the same maximum penalty, though some have argued that due to Gods extreme goodness, even the smallest of sin is detestable to him to that point.
But the Christian system that is being espoused here is making all transgressions, including original sin, worthy of the same maximum penalty. This has truly 'dispensed with' the principle of proportionality.
Rather I am saying that under the Christian view point, the sum total of our sins is worthy of the maximum punishment. Different Christians give different reasons why this is, it could be that original sin itself is sufficient, though some Christians suggest that infants may not be given a direct ticket to hell.
But I think the real point I would like to make is that although we have an instinctual sense of justice and proportional punishment and all that, the truth is that there really needs to be a justification for punishment in any justice system, and in the theistic system, no justification is given. Until justification is given, I would say that no principles, such as proportionality of punishment, can be applied. It is wrong to make analogies with the worldly based criminal justice system and expect those analogies to hold, when fundamental aspects are clearly different.
The human criminal justice system is based on two key motives:
1. Punishment serves as a deterrent.
2. Incarceration/death/banishment/exile etc serve to directly prevent repeat crimes.
Without these motives, it actually becomes, to my mind, immoral to punish. In fact, in modern society, I am actually in favour of a much less punitive and much more correctional criminal justice system than prevails in most societies today.
It must be noted that to a large extent we have a sense of justice that we have evolved to have, but that does not mean that it is a universal moral law.
So let me ask you this: suppose you acknowledge committing at least some sin. After you die, God punishes you, but that punishment serves no purpose ie you didn't know about it prior to committing the sin, so it wasn't a threat, and the punishment doesn't include preventing you from harming others, and the punishment doesn't result in you committing less sin in heaven or wherever you are sent after your punishment.
Assuming the punishment above is perfectly proportional to your sin and is applied equally and fairly to every human being, would you say that it is 'justice'? Would you say that it is morally correct?
26 Mar 13
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFWho's presumptuous? Did I say you only go twice a year? Why do you read yourself into what I said? I was talking about people in my congregation, not about you (I know, hard to understand, right?).
You're being a wee bit too presumptuous, Suzianne. I go every week, not just twice a year, to help my spouse with the kids, who are 9 and 13 and prone to restlessness.
I did say I was glad to see you participating. Is that what I'm presuming about? Do you just go through the motions, is it only an intellectual exercise for you? Great, then forget I said that last part if it bothers you so much.
26 Mar 13
Originally posted by twhiteheadYou're not sure how it works, you don't want to be asked how it works, but you're so sure you know exactly what Christians believe and why. And then you go on to bastardize that belief into a parody.
I think it does. Most Christians believe that everybody is guilty of sin, either their own or inherited from Adam (so called 'original sin', which even those that don't take genesis literally still seem to believe in, not sure how it works though).
They believe that everybody deserves the worst possible punishment (hell, of various descriptions).
They b ...[text shortened]... the real question is, when a Judge pays the fine for a murderer on death row, is that Just?
If you don't know how it works, and don't want to know how it works, then do us a favor and stop running your mouth off about something you know so little about.