28 Oct 08
2 edits
Originally posted by kastOn planet Earth, it is impossible for complete mercy and complete justice to simultaneously occur. For example, if literally everybody who committed a crime received an appropriate sentence, then complete justice would be accomplished, but there would be no mercy. Alternatively, if everybody who committed a crime received amnesty, then complete mercy would be accomplished, but there would be no justice. The final alternative would be to punish some and to give others amnesty, in which case there would be both partial justice and partial mercy, but neither complete justice nor complete mercy.
Why did he have to let his son get tortured (himself get tortured)? Why not simply forgive us? Why not simply get rid of the devil?
My point is, if God "forgave" everybody, his Perfect Mercy would be manifested, but his Perfect Justice would not be. And if God gave everybody what they deserved (i.e. He was "fair".), we would be eternally separated from Him.
The bottom line is this: Christ's cruxification paid the penalty in full for all the sins ever committed on Earth, thus manifiesting God's Perfect Justice. And God's Perfect Mercy was manfested by Him applying this "payment of sin" to each person's "personal account." In short, God's plan of redemption allows Him to express his Perfect Justice and his Perfect Mercy at the same time.
Anyway, that is my current understanding of the matter.
28 Oct 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerWell said. 😉
On planet Earth, it is impossible for complete mercy and complete justice to simultaneously occur. For example, if literally everybody who committed a crime received an appropriate sentence, then complete justice would be accomplished, but there would be no mercy. Alternatively, if everybody who committed a crime received amnesty, then complete merc ...[text shortened]... Mercy at the same time.
Anyway, that is my current understanding of the matter.
28 Oct 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerHuman sacrifice as a way of paying for someone else's crimes is always a good way to being justice to the world. Right?
On planet Earth, it is impossible for complete mercy and complete justice to simultaneously occur. For example, if literally everybody who committed a crime received an appropriate sentence, then complete justice would be accomplished, but there would be no mercy. Alternatively, if everybody who committed a crime received amnesty, then complete merc ...[text shortened]... Mercy at the same time.
Anyway, that is my current understanding of the matter.
28 Oct 08
Originally posted by gaychessplayerThanks for responding gaychessplayer.
On planet Earth, it is impossible for complete mercy and complete justice to simultaneously occur. [text shortened]...press his Perfect Justice and his Perfect Mercy at the same time.
Anyway, that is my current understanding of the matter.
1) First, why is it not possible for god to allow all of us to start off in a perfect world and not be impacted by someone else's actions such as adam and eve's curious fruit munching or an abusive alcoholic father's drunken wrath? I find it puzzling that god has something impossible for him to do when he can do all things.
2) If god created everyone on equal footing and we were all born equally well-off, who is to say that we wouldn't have a dramatic decrease in crime? Many of those that commit crime do so due to their environment or a congenital defect in their ability to sympathize or something similar. In other words, why doesn't god give us all an equal shot?
3) How is life "fair"? God's not "fair" to many people from the point of birth. Would you agree that he should at the very least make it fair for everyone at birth? Of course, people grow in a society and are always going to be affected by other people including their parents and friends. That's reality. But that's just it. Reality is different from any way a god that cares about us would make it. Why is reality different from any sensible god's creation? In MY opinion, it's because god doesn't exist.
4) Jesus being crucified pays the debt and allows for God's "Perfect Justice"? This is supposed to mean that if Hitler had asked god for forgiveness before dying (let's say, for argument's sake, that it was not suicide), then he would go to heaven but I, who feel bad for even hunting a bird, would go to hell? That doesn't make sense. God paid for everyone's sin. We only get to go to heaven, though, if we believe he did it. Forgive me for saying this, but that's a little like a fantasy movie where you only see it if you believe it. Either jesus paid for my sins or he didn't. If he did, it doesn't matter what I do...I should go to heaven. If he died for me but still sends me to hell for not "accepting my salvation", then God needs to go back in time and take back one or two lashes in the torture of his son (himself) because I'm paying for my own sins.
As for your statement about the serpent and all that (you said something of it being symbolic of all animals getting put out of eden), why did all the animals pay if it was just us? Why do other animals have labor pains if eve was the one punished with this? Is it because god grouped the animals with us (rightly so, as we're all animals)?
Once again, I appreciate your efforts at explaining this and await your response. Also, I'd like your take on the children issue included mostly in the last post I made and a little in this one.
28 Oct 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungI don't know if human sacrifice is always a good way to bring justice to the world, but it was the method that God chose to redeem the the human race.
Human sacrifice as a way of paying for someone else's crimes is always a good way to being justice to the world. Right?