The problem of evil

[Dave Ellis]

So why in your opinion is it acceptable for a judge to sentence someone to death but a vigilante cannot kill someone they believed to deserve to die?

Due process. The judge will only sentence after the evidence has been examined and the defendant has had a chance to defend themselves against the accusations. With vigilantism there is no due process, and it's very likely some innocent people will wind up getting killed.

That being said, I don't agree with the death penalty, however this explanation works for most serious crimes.

Simply put....yes. If you have a problem with that you can take that up with Him on judgement day. What does morality mean? Doing anything that fulfills God's will is good, anything that does not is bad.

So in essence, you're arguing there is no objective moral standard. If god has a standard, and we have another standard, then morality is not one big monolithic standard. It's subjective, god has the rules he plays by, and we have rules that we're supposed to play by.

If morality has an objective basis, then it would necessarily apply to god and ourselves equally.

And what about euthanasia on the terminally I'll and assisted suicide?

I agree with assisted suicide for the terminally ill. If all they have to look forward to is six months of unspeakable agony, it's simply cruel to make them endure that.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I read the passages.

Even if hating him was something worthy of punishment, I still don't see how it's justifiable to punish the child, grandchild or great grandchild of the person who actually hated god. What did they do wrong? It's very likely two of the three, if not all three weren't even born when the hating was being done.

I first got caught up in a few commentaries that suggested the scripture meant those who hatred God were the generations as well as the original perpetrator but at this point anyway, those arguments just seem a bit too shaky for me. I'm still looking into it but figured I'd better say something since Hitch seemed to be getting a little impatient.

In the end it's still the same with me as it is with others, as in Dad's and judges, have a tough Job and maybe if they were tougher on sin they wouldn't have a tough Job, or maybe not, but still that's the punishment God chose to e deal out at the time whether I like it or not, and I accept it.

As to the question at hand being viable, appears so at this point but again, I'm still looking into it...it's an interesting subject.

Quick edit: I think Hating God as you seem to indicate might not be a big deal in itself, I'd guess many who hate God don't have much interest in his commandments and sin regularly so, probably not just the hate, although that may be enough in itself.

 

[Dave Ellis]

I first got caught up in a few commentaries that suggested the scripture meant those who hatred God were the generations as well as the original perpetrator but at this point anyway, those arguments just seem a bit too shaky for me. I'm still looking into it but figured I'd better say something since Hitch seemed to be getting a little impatient.

In the end it's still the same with me as it is with others, as in Dad's and judges, have a tough Job and maybe if they were tougher on sin they wouldn't have a tough Job, or maybe not, but still that's the punishment God chose to e deal out at the time whether I like it or not, and I accept it.

Dads and judges may have a tough job, but presumably nothing is difficult for god. So, I'm not sure that's an apt comparison.

Regardless, punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is not getting "tougher on sin", it doesn't put any added punishment on the person committing the sin at all. So, I don't really buy that explanation either..... And regardless, punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is unjust at its very heart. Even if the intention was to get tougher on sin, the way to do that is a harsher punishment on the person committing the sin, not punishing people who had nothing to do with it.

That's one of the main reasons why I can't accept it. A just being would not do those things.

As to the question at hand being viable, appears so at this point but again, I'm still looking into it...it's an interesting subject.

Fair enough. But, when you look into it, keep in mind all possible options.

Quick edit: I think Hating God as you seem to indicate might not be a big deal in itself, I'd guess many who hate God don't have much interest in his commandments and sin regularly so, probably not just the hate, although that may be enough in itself.

What do you mean?

 

[Picky Picky]

My best guess would be same reason he required animal sacrifices for sin, as in others will suffer for our sins. And maybe that was just part of the bummer of losing paradise...part of the punishment of working by the sweat of our brows to survive..part of the making life harder physically and mentally in making us feel like crap for what was done.

If you feel that's not fair...evidently God thought the end justified the means and it was just that important to make the point to us. Many of us may think it's not fair, and all I can figure is those that don't (been there myself) just don't see the importance of it as God does. If you disagree, you'd have to take that up with him, and since realistically you may not get an answer, that's where the faith comes in and I anyway, even though I might not think it fair, just assume he did the best thing. Back to the realistic side, what choice do I really have? not accept he exists because I don't like what he does? The alternatives are few so I just choose to trust him. Seems the most logical of the choices, especially as opposed to complete annihilation or living in very uncomfortable place for eternity.

Why should the antelope be punished?

 

[Picky Picky]

He's as all loving as our Dads might have been when he felt terrible for having to punish us but did it anyway.

That's not an accurate analogy. An accurate analogy would be that I misbehave so my Dad kicks the cat. Is that right?

Edit: or rather, that my distant ancestor did something that annoys my Dad, so he's angry with me, and kicks the cat.

 

[Picky Picky]

It is a difficult prospective to imagine from within the fish-bowl of our universe and life, but from without (and truth be known), God was indeed all-loving to contain everything objectionable within this current no-harm realm.

Sorry, could you rephrase that? I don't follow you.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Why should the antelope be punished?

That's not an accurate analogy. An accurate analogy would be that I misbehave so my Dad kicks the cat. Is that right?

Edit: or rather, that my distant ancestor did something that annoys my Dad, so he's angry with me, and kicks the cat.

Punishment in general was my point whether it be by punishing others like animal being sacrificed for our sin or otherwise. He did what he did to make his point to us, and often that can be achieved by punishing ones loved ones instead of the guilty, we see it all the time in the movies. It's effective.

No fair? Tell him about it.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

..He did what he did to make his point to us, and often that can be achieved by punishing ones loved ones instead of the guilty, we see it all the time in the movies. It's effective.

Effective in perpetuating hatred and engendering a desire for revenge. He should know better than to take His cue from movies.

 

[Kenny'sID]

He should know better than to take His cue from movies.

I guess that sounded good to you at the time you posted it anyway...lol.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

No fair? Tell him about it.

While I understand that the theist ultimately has to fall back to "might makes right" when discussing a god's morality, I think we inherently have the deep seated feeling that this isn't correct. It certainly doesn't sit well with people when discussing any situation not regarding a god.

If your god commanded it, would you personally punish someone for something they didn't do?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Effective in perpetuating hatred and engendering a desire for revenge.

Yep, Like ones loving dad punishing them is all about revenge. I guess on some level one might see things that way but it's not the idea at all, however if you want an excuse for your hatred of God, that's as good as any I suppose.

 

[Kenny'sID]

If your god commanded it, would you personally punish someone for something they didn't do?

When he asks that of me, I'll let you know how I respond.

Does God still do this or is it all OT stuff?

 

[Picky Picky]

Punishment in general was my point whether it be by punishing others like animal being sacrificed for our sin or otherwise. He did what he did to make his point to us, and often that can be achieved by punishing ones loved ones instead of the guilty, we see it all the time in the movies. It's effective.

No fair? Tell him about it.

Good grief, it sounds more immoral the more you describe it.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

When he asks that of me, I'll let you know how I respond.

Does God still do this or is it all OT stuff?

Your avoidance of the hypothetical is really all I need to know.

 

[Kenny'sID]

Your avoidance of the hypothetical is really all I need to know.

And again with the taunts. Some would have caught on the the point of my answer...guess it's all about selective understanding when one has agenda.

Let me try that, your avoidance of the question I asked along with that comment is really all *I* need to know.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Punishment in general was my point whether it be by punishing others like animal being sacrificed for our sin or otherwise. He did what he did to make his point to us, and often that can be achieved by punishing ones loved ones instead of the guilty, we see it all the time in the movies. It's effective.

No fair? Tell him about it.

So you think that punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is acceptable then?

If you stand by what you just said, then you have demonstrated that your god is not just.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

So you think that punishing the innocent for the crimes of the guilty is acceptable then?

Animal sacrifices are not about "punishing" innocent animals for the crimes of the guilty.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[Dave Ellis]

Animal sacrifices are not about "punishing" innocent animals for the crimes of the guilty.

You're still murdering an innocent creature for something it had no part in. Is that moral?

If you were killing it for food, that's one thing. However, you're killing it to burn in a fire to make your god all chipper.

 

[(° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)]

You're still murdering an innocent creature for something it had no part in. Is that moral?

If you were killing it for food, that's one thing. However, you're killing it to burn in a fire to make your god all chipper.

What if by killing that innocent animal, a lesson was taught that saved someone's life?


Btw....the animals were not completely destroyed and discarded. Only certain parts of the animal were burned. The rest was given to the priests or the poor.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[bhsmte]

What if by killing that innocent animal, a lesson was taught that saved someone's life?

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Why would you need to kill an animal, to teach someone a lesson?