The trilemma all gods face

[Wootah]

Hi all,

It just seemed like a lot of people on the site were not familiar with the trilemma all gods worth following face. This is the trilemma of is the God good, is it just and is it loving.

So what's the issue.

If the God is good then it is just. If it is not just then it is not good.
If the God is just then it cannot be merciful. if the god wants to show mercy on someone then it is not being just. If it wants to be just then it is not being merciful.
If a Good is merciful then it is not being just and nor is it being good.

No god outside of God resolves this trilemma. For instance Allah is claimed to be just and merciful but never explains how it is being just or merciful when it shows mercy on someone. Worse since we know Allah is claimed to be merciful then we know Allah is not just or good. If a God is not good then there is nothing to trust and so why does anyone follow Allah? What proof is there that Allah actually is merciful.

So in Christianity the trilemma is resolved.

Mankind's sins require justice.
God justly sentences us to hell.
God also loves us and so pays for our sins.
Those that wish to accept that payment for their sins are able to justly go to heaven.
In this way God shows that he is good, just and loving.

Obviously the floor is open to disagreement or refinement of the above.

[connermt]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

That's a very pretty set-up there W.
Though, I wouldn't call any god just &/or loving that does the following:
-drown men, women, children, babies, unborn babies, animals no matter the reasons (drowning is a horrible way to die...perhaps second to only burning to death - which many christians claim will happen the next time god gets a bee in his bonnet)
-killing first born children due to their leader's issues
-drowning an army because they are following orders
-allowing Job to suffer to prove a point to another supernatural being when they both know the outcome
-setting up mankind for sin when it was entirely possible to avoid it all the while allowing for the 'glorified' free will
Not to mention all the issues in the world today....

Some may (and do/will) call this loving and justify said god's actions, but I don't know, I suppose I expect more than this god is capable of....?

[Elijah John]

How is consigning anyone to hell, an eternity of torture, justice? In any sense of the word?

How is infinite punishment for finite sins just?

How hell it NOT disproportional punishment?

If a human judge gave out the death penalty (the ultimate judicial punishment) for every offense, even say parking violations, would that judge be considered just?

Of course not.

How then can human justice and human standards be more fair than God's own justice, who is more merciful, just and compassionate than any of us.

There must be something wrong with this picture.

Could it be the doctrine of hell itself is warped, and not God?

Could it be that our image of God is seriously flawed?

I'm not saying there is no Divine justice after death, a balancing of the scales.

But how is it that we puny humans deserve to be eternaly tortured?

To use an metaphor from the hellfire preacher Jonathan Edwards, who considered us more detestable to God than we humans consider spiders, even if we are "spiders" over a flame in the sight of God, wouldn't it be considered extremely cruel for us humans to torture a spider instead of just squashing them when necessary?

If we are so offensive to God by our very existence to supposedly warrant hell, why doesn't He just annihilate us who deserve punishment instead of eternal torture?

I think the doctrine of annihilation of consciousness of the "unsaved" at least is more merciful than the doctrine of eternal torture of hell.

And some, such as the Jehovah's Witnesses, have made a good Biblical case for that more merciful outcome.

To believe in infinite torture as the default position for most of mankind, it seems to me is to make God out to be a monster, and not compassionate and merciful and certainly not just.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]
Basically, you've swap the word "merciful" with the word "loving." That doesn't resolve anything.

[mwtech]

f the God is good then it is just. If it is not just then it is not good.
If the God is just then it cannot be merciful. if the god wants to show mercy on someone then it is not being just. If it wants to be just then it is not being merciful.
If a Good is merciful then it is not being just and nor is it being good.

Psalm 100:5
For the Lord is good, his mercy is everlasting.
Psalm 103:8
The Lord is merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and plenteous in mercy.
Lamentations 3:33
;For he doth not afflict willingly nor grieve the children of men.

So if a god who is merciful is not good or just then the Christian God is not good or just. The Bible says many times that he is merciful.

So in Christianity the trilemma is resolved.

Mankind's sins require justice.
God justly sentences us to hell.
God also loves us and so pays for our sins.
Those that wish to accept that payment for their sins are able to justly go to heaven.
In this way God shows that he is good, just and loving.

Obviously the floor is open to disagreement or refinement of the above.[/quote]

[McCulloch]

[Replying to Wootah]

So in Christianity the trilemma is resolved.

I don't think so. I'll explain why.

Mankind's sins require justice.

Why? This is not a trivial question. Humanity has developed the idea of justice because it provides a framework for a more workable society and it is a recognition that we are fundamentally the same. We would like to build a society based on the ideal of fairness. Justice includes a number of concepts including equality under the law; being rewarded fairly for one's skills and efforts; having the expectation to be punished for seeking to deprive someone else of something that they should fairly have. Why should we want a just society? Cats and bears do not seem to worry to much about justice.
We want a just society because it works better for us collectively and individually, if we can expect fair treatment from other humans. We have to expend less effort protecting our stuff and our lives when there is an expectation that the others will behave justly.
So, does God's wanting to punish us in the afterlife for our sins against him make any sense? Why is it necessary for God to punish humans for breaking the Sabbath or eating pork?

God justly sentences us to hell.

There are a number of theories about justice in sentencing. None of them are appropriate to God sentencing us to hell. [source: Wikipedia: Theories of Sentencing]

[mrow]Theory[mcol]Goal of theory[mcol]Example punishments [mcol]God justly sentences us to hell. [row]Retribution [col]Punishment imposed for no reason other than an offense being committed, on the basis that if proportionate, punishment is morally acceptable as a response that satisfies the aggrieved party, their intimates and society. [col]Tariff sentences Sentence must be proportionate to the crime [col]An eternity in hell is not a retribution that is proportional to most of the crimes against God. [row]Deterrence [col]To the individual - the individual is deterred through fear of further punishment. To the general public - Potential offenders warned as to likely punishment[col]Prison Sentence Heavy Fine Long sentence as an example to others [col]I understand that a belief in punishment in the afterlife might serve as a deterrent to those alive now, but it would be a much better deterrent if there was some way of validating that it did, in fact, take place. It provides no deterrent at all to unbelievers. [row]Rehabilitation [col]To reform the offender's behavior [col]Individualized sentences Community service orders [col]Given that the sentence to hell is eternal, there is no possibility of rehabilitation. God seems to have neglected this aspect of justice. [row]Incapacitation [col]Offender is made incapable of committing further crime to protect society at large from crime [col]Long prison sentence Electronic tagging Banning orders [col]Simply being dead guarantees that the sinner no longer sins. [row]Reparation [col]Repayment to victim(s) or to community [col]Compensation Unpaid work Reparation Schemes [col]Again, this aspect of justice is neglected by the God. An all powerful God needs no reparations and the possible victims of human sin get no reparation from sinners being in hell. [row]Denunciation [col]Society expressing its disapproval reinforcing moral boundaries [col]Reflects blameworthiness of offense [col]Hell is significantly more than simple denunciation.

God also loves us and so pays for our sins.

This violates the principle of justice. If I have committed a crime and a just punishment has been passed for me, it would be fundamentally unjust, to the victims of my crimes and to the other criminals facing punishment, if the judge would say, "It's all right, I'll pay for it this time."

Those that wish to accept that payment for their sins are able to justly go to heaven.

If the punishment is just, then the heavenly reward for those who do not deserve it is unjust. If what you say is true, then I wish to accept that unjust payment for my sins and go to heaven after I die. My problem is not in rejecting God's unjust but gracious offer. My problem is that I don't believe that the offer has actually been made. Partly because it does not make any sense and certainly does not solve the trilemma.

In this way God shows that he is good, just and loving.

I hope that I have explained how I think that this does not show the Christian God as being good, just and loving.

[Divine Insight]

So in Christianity the trilemma is resolved.

Mankind's sins require justice.
God justly sentences us to hell.

Obviously the floor is open to disagreement or refinement of the above.

I'm going have to chime in with Elijah John. You so-called resolution is already dead in the water with your first two lines Wootah.

Hell is not a just punishment for the sins of MOST people. In fact, an eternal punishment with no possibility of parole is actually unjust even for the most wicked of sinners.

Also what intelligence sense does it even make?

Of what use is a punishment that that serves no purpose? Even when we whack a dog with a stick to train it we do this expecting that it will learn from the experience to stop doing whatever we whacked it for.

An eternal hell can't even be said to have value in training.

What is the justification for eternal punishment? And who benefits from it?

If the people who are being punished can never benefit from the punishment, then the only possible purpose for hell would be to satisfy God that someone is being tortured for having done something wrong. In fact, the Bible itself makes it clear that this is an act of vengeance (a human flaw).

There is nothing positive or constructive to be gained out of vengeance. Vengeance is a negative emotional reaction to something born of hatred. Even humans who hate others to the point of wanting to seek vengeance against them are most likely to give it up after a period of time and eventaully forgive and get over it.

In the case of the Biblical God we have a God who never gets over his hateful vengeance. How is that "Justice"?

Moreover, this religion demands that people will go to hell for the most trivial and innocent things, like for not even believing in this hateful vengeful God.

Atheists point this out all the time. If they sincerely and honestly can't see why anyone would believe that Hebrew mythology is anything other than an immoral mythology about a God who is as highly emotionally flawed as the worse humans, then why should they be cast into a state of eternal damnation.

You would call that "justice"?

Sorry, but you haven't even come close to justifying these highly immoral fables.

They are ignorant and insane. They are highly male-chauvinistic and religiously bigoted to the hilt and they offer no sense of justice whatsoever.

The God in these myths doesn't even give people rational alternatives to his ultimatums.

Like I say, it's considered an almighty sin to simply not believe in these myths.

There is also no way to even politely decline this God insane offer. If you don't condone having God's supposedly innocent son beaten and crucified on a pole to pay for you supposed "sins", you can't even decline this politely.

In other words, if I were to say to this God, "I'm sorry God buy I don't condone your methods and your game, could you please just un-create me peacefully without hurting me?"

That's a no-no. There is no peaceful way to decline the demands of this God, you either agree with all his immoral behaviors and plans and pretend to love him with all your heart, mind, and soul, or you are cast into his hateful eternal hell.

And you call that justice?

No Wootah, this Hebrew mythology cannot be justified. It's insane and immoral.

Period.

The only sane conclusion is to recognize that it is indeed nothing more than a totally fictional superstitious story made up by unethical male-chauvinistic men, and that it is indeed an immoral story to boot.

[Elijah John]

Just an additional observation from this Theist here,

Is mercy part of God's character? I think we would both agree that it is.

If so, why couldn't God just forgive the REPENTANT? Seems justice would still be upheld because the crime would not be continued if the criminal/sinner was no longer commiting those sin/crimes. Especially if some reparation was made in human on human crimes/sins.

In that sense OT justice is more humane than NT supposed justice. There is no docrine of hell in the OT.

I do not see how requiring "payment" or satisfaction for sin is mercy, and to posit such a theology is to imply that God is incapable of forgiveness without appeasement.

HUMANS are able to justly forgive WITHOUT appeasement. Are we more humans more just and merciful than God? It would seem so if the doctrine of blood atonement is to be believed.

And to posit that God needs blood sacrifice is to imply that He is no better than bloodthirsty Pagan deities who need appeasement.

And we both believe as ethical Abrahamic Monotheists that He IS better, don't we?

[Haven]

Worse since we know Allah is claimed to be merciful then we know Allah is not just or good.

How is mercy inherently unjust?

Consider this example: a judge releases in 15 years a criminal who was sentenced to 20 years but has shown signs of contrition, rehabilitation, and desire to contribute to society. The state's justice system and the victim are satisfied with the inmate's contrition and change and want him to be released. All evidence shows he is very unlikely to reoffend. How is this unjust?

Mankind's sins require justice.
God justly sentences us to hell.

No. Infinite punishment for finite offenses is not just, it is disproportionate and therefore unjust, and infinite torture for anything is immoral. Torture is never justified, regardless of the crime.

God also loves us and so pays for our sins.

A basic tenet of any reasonable system of justice is that the guilty one alone can pay for his/her crimes. An innocent person suffering for the crimes of the guilty is the height of injustice. If the Christian god punished an innocent person (the Biblical Jesus*) for the crimes/sins of the guilty, then he is no better than a corrupt judge who willfully convicts someone he known to be innocent. That is the very definition of injustice and the opposite of goodness or mercy!

Those that wish to accept that payment for their sins are able to justly go to heaven.

How is it possibly just to accept the fact that an innocent person was punished for your crimes? Anyone who would accept such a "sacrifice" is no better than a criminal who rests easily knowing he is escaping punishment because an innocent, wrongfully convicted person is sitting in prison for the crimes the criminal committed. How is this anything but gross immorality and injustice?

In this way God shows that he is good, just and loving.

No, in this way the inventors of Christianity have crafted a god that is both unmerciful (by requiring a pound of flesh instead of simply pardoning those deemed worthy of it) and unjust (by extracting the pound of flesh from the wrong person). The traditional Christian doctrine of salvation is completely morally bankrupt.

[Bede]

[Replying to post 1 by Wootah]

This view of God assumes that we approached him in a legal context as a just Judge. As a just Judge his justice requires punishment given on an impartial basis.

However as Christians we should be approaching God as a merciful Father. Fathers are not required to administer strict legal justice but can be merciful to their children if they make an effort to please him and are sorry for what they have done.

A Judge has no personal relationship with the offender whereas out heavenly Father is seeking a personal relationship with us as his children.

Its the difference between Law and Grace.