God, justice, fairness and perfection

[Justin108]

For this debate, I need you to answer each of these questions in order.

1. Is God perfectly fair and just?

2. If God is not perfectly fair and just, does that mean God is by definition imperfect?

3. Does everyone have an equal chance in getting into heaven?

4. If everyone does not have an equal chance in getting into heaven, is God still perfectly fair and just?

[JehovahsWitness]

Anyway, if going to heaven is in fact a privilege over paradise, then we have enough evidence to conclude that God is unfair.

Premise 1: The privilege of going to heaven is afforded only to believers

Not to all believers only 144,000 that lived after Christ's death.

In my opinion, fairness is not about giving everyone the same opportunity to do the same thing but rather applying the same rules and standards to everyone without bias in other words applying the same criteria to everyone. In this case the criteria is, one must believe in Jesus.

The way I see it it's like a company just one vacancy, is it unfair to advertise and select one candidate? What would be unfair is to apply different rules to different candidates for example ask that black people that apply must have a PhD but white people that are applying for the same post only a highschool diploma. Is the employer being unfair to give the one job to one person instead of the one job to everyone in the neighbourhood, including those that have no qualifications or skills to do the job? And those that don't even WANT the job?

The privilege of going to heaven was extened for a limited amount of time to those whom he chose from a fixed base. I see it as fair because anyone that meets the criteria has an equal chance of being chosen and He doesn't exclude those that meet his standards based on skin colour or sex. Since its a gift not a right, I don't personally see God as being "unfair" in choosing certain individuals available at the time needed.

Anyway, that is how I see it, I think we will have to agree to disagree on how "fair" this arrangement is.


JW

[JehovahsWitness]

Premise 2: Not everyone has an equal opportunity to be a believer (you agreed on this in post 127

That is true at the moment. For that reason, I believe the bible which presents a resurrection. This will mean that everyone will be given an equal opportunity to learn about Jesus and his kingdom and decide if they want to live in this new world or not.

The resurrection therefore, imho, is an expression of Divine justice.

JW

[JehovahsWitness]

To illustrate, the current situation is:
- moral atheists: paradise (as their "sin/crime" of unbelief is automatically resolved during judgement)

Yet during judgement, no one will be an unbeliever as everyone will see God... so no one is then destroyed for being an unbeliever.

I think I understand what you're missing in the explanation; correct me if I'm mistaken: you think that "disbelief" "unbelief" "unfaithful" is limited to "not believing in the existence of a Creator". Biblically speaking that is not the case.

In the bible, faith/belief is much more than simply accepting that there is a Creator. Atheism is a type of disbelief, sure but someone can accept that there is a creator but still decide they do not "believe" God's way of doing things is the best way, they do not "believe" he should tell them what to do, they do not "believe" a system where humans have to submit to higher rule if they are perfect, in short, biblically you can accept there is a God and still be without faith/belief.

For example, the bible explains that demons [rebellious angels] believe there is a Creator, ie demons are not atheists, but this does not mean they accept to live by that one's standards. Indeed Satan believes in God. This however doesn't mean he (Satan) has "faith" in God, he doesn't respect God, he doesn't wish to obey God and he doesn't want to live according to the (heiratical) system of God.

People that are allowed or are resurrected to life will not logically after that moment be atheists. But whether they choose, after being given time and opportunity to learn about the True God, to willingly live according to that one's standards, (ie in biblical terms whether they choose to have faith in that God) is another matter. That is why in fairness God will resurrect "the wicked" and give them time to decide what they want to do (the bible speaks of 1000 years). Atheism will be a non-issue but the real issue, one of faith, submission, obediance, comformity and love of God, will need time to be settled for each individual.


At the end of 1000 years, we believe everyone in paradise will be judged . Those that wish to submit to God's rule will live on. Those that don't will not be forced to live on.


JW

[ttruscott]

They have shown that they will not accept or come, even though they could if they repented, humbled themselves and came to Him. They have revealed which father they belong to (which father they have chosen) by what they DO.

Where is there a lack of patience in this? What does patience even have to do with this?


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Good morning,
now I think we are getting somewhere... "They have shown that they will not accept or come, even though they could"...does 'shown' have the connotation of 'proven'? It must or this statement and adds nothing to the topic, eh?

It is logical that if they have shown/proved that their choice to they will not repent is absolutely irrevocable, then there is no more need to wait for them to repent.

So, scenario 1. they are accepted that they will never repent, pronounced irrevocable reprobates and placed under sentence by HIS judgement to be carried out in the future. At this point the recognition is that their ability to repent and return is gone forever by their own choice. The definition for this time is not some arbitrary time of GOD's choice nor any ending of patience BUT IT IS by their choice to cross a line that once crossed, there is no return.

Scenario 2, (which I thought you might be espousing) is that the offer to repent is alway open, there is no showing or proving they will never repent but rather suddenly GOD decides it is time for the judgement (what I called the end of HIS patience) and at the great white throne of judgment, their pleas that they are repenting fall on deaf ears. I have had many teach me this is the correct and proper scenario though not one has any reason for HIS patience to end nor any understanding of why to say HIS patience ends when it is a factor of HIS loving attributes, blasphemes that love. This scenario is the one that logically ends with universal salvation in that HE will never quit waiting so the judgement seat is a lie and worthless as doctrine and all warnings are foolish babble.

Since I too accept fully scenario 1, my estimate of your opinion has indeed gone up, as it does for anyone who agrees with me, which I hope I got right.

Now how this ties to my theology: since 1. the serpent arrived as fully evil and condemned in the newly made garden and since 2. his evil, craftiness, is the same word for the being unclothed in righteousness before GOD, that is, being naked, the nakedness Adam and Eve had before they ate and which was the sin they saw when their eyes were opened after they ate (They did not see their eating, eh?) and nakedness is part of being spiritually blind as in Rev 3:17, and since 3. Eve was already friends (discussing the life and death aspects of theology) with the serpent who was GOD's enemy which means she too was GOD's enemy (a sinner) or that HE was refusing to protect HIS newly created love from this predator for no reason...

since all these things are written, I believe that their sin and especially the serpent's sin that was proven to be irrevocably unrepentant by this time and therefore condemned already, happened before they came to the garden and other verses being taken into consideration, well before they creation of the world.

That is, I believe that the choice / attitude / commitment against GOD / etc that created some to be irrevocably, that is, eternally, sinners under judgement of damnation happened pre-earth, before the creation of the physical universe. The proving the choices of irreconcilability to GOD and their inevitable judgment which you see as being near the end of life or time on this earth I believe to have occurred already. Some decisions are being worked out on earth to fulfill HIS promise of redemption made to HIS elect pre-choice as the parable of the good seed and the weeds says / hints?.

Am I right that we both believe the same thing happens to the condemned already, they irrevocably prove their non-repentance to GOD and their inability to repent is recognized but you believe this happens on earth and I believe this happens pre-earth. Nice...

Peace...

[Justin108]

The point is, according to the Jehovah's Witness interpretation of Scripture, is for righteous people to live happily.

This doesn't really answer the question. The dilemma is, a perfect world has no goals that need to be achieved. There is no work to be done, no orders to be given. The purpose of a king is look after his people. He gives orders to his people in order to maintain order and prosperity. In a perfect world where nothing is needed, a king doesn't do anything. He just sits there. No one ever goes to the king and says "your majesty, there are problems in the kingdom". A king never addresses his people and says "I need you to do the following things for the sake of the kingdom". No orders are ever given because nothing needs to be done. Everything is complete. Everything is perfect. In a perfect world, a hierarchy is entirely arbitrary. Saying "it is for righteous people to live happily" does not address the dilemma at all. It is a valueless answer. It would be like asking "why do horses wear shoes?" If someone answered "so that the horses can be happy" is this really an answer? No. Why do horseshoes make the horse happy? What do the shoes do? What is their function? So back to a heavenly hierarchy: what is the function of the leaders? What do they do? What kind of orders do they give? What do they mean to achieve?

Scripture indicates (I'm not using the exact words, am deducing from several passages and putting them in my own words according to my understanding of their meaning) that to be happy humans need leadership and order.

Earlier you said...

God never intended any intelligent being (even perfect) to exist without someone above them in terms of authority

Why does a perfect entity need authority? Authority only serves to keep those under them in order. A perfect entity left to his own accords will not turn to disorder because the entity is perfect. If the entity were to turn to disorder, then this would be an imperfect entity.

I am unclear whether you believe those in heaven are all perfect. Suppose they weren't... things still wouldn't make sense. The only reason people turn to disorder on earth is due to our current situation. We are mortal, we have finite resources. These factors provoke fear, greed and anger and these vices are the cause of disorder. If we were immortal, without fear, pain, suffering, and an endless supply of anything we will ever need, who would ever turn to disorder? What would "disorder" even look like? Would people kill each other? They can't, they're immortal. Will they steal from each other? No, because supply is limitless and we have no needs anymore. Will they torture each other? They can't because pain no longer exists. So how is disorder even possible in heaven?

Suppose disorder were possible somehow. Why does God need a hierarchy of authority? The only reason there is a chain of hierarchy in this world is because the king is finite in his capabilities. He cannot personally oversee everything, and so he appoints others who will do this. To God, this is unnecessary. He can personally oversee everything with no effort. So why assign a hierarchy?
None of this makes any sense.

I cannot say for sure, the bible indicates (not the exact words, I am deducing from several scriptures) that those that go to heaven will make up the heavenly Government under Christ and that further instructions as to how things will be restructured will be provided at the appropriate time.

Restructured? Wait, will heaven undergo change? Isn't heaven perfect as is?

Will people on earth still need to work to survive?

Yes.

- Wait... so people can die in paradise if they do not work? Didn't you say have eternal life?
- Do you have scripture to support your claim that we will need to work to survive in paradise?

I feel the need for satisfying work is fundamental in humans. So while we may be working for "ourselves" doing what we enjoy, we will still be "working". Humans that have nothing to do or live solely for superficial pleasures, are rarely in my opinion happy.

- You are assuming all humans are the same. Some enjoy work, others do not. This could be another example of an unfair outcome as only those who enjoy work will enjoy paradise

Biblically yes. The bible that speaks of people being able (for example) to build and live in their own homes and of course we will still need to eat, so the bible speaks about planting and reaping and of people enjoying the fruitage of their work whether their "work" is designing, building, exploring, creating, inventing or maybe all of the above at various times...

Verse?

Not to all believers only 144,000 that lived after Christ's death.

I never said "all believers" but belief is a requirement. So while immoral believers will not go to heaven, moral non-believers are also excluded. If you do not have belief, you do not go to heaven. And as we agreed upon in post 127, not everyone has an equal chance in believing.

In my opinion, fairness is not about giving everyone the same opportunity to do the same thing but rather applying the same rules and standards to everyone without bias in other words applying the same criteria to everyone. In this case the criteria is, one must believe in Jesus.

Suppose the government allowed only white people to vote, would this be unfair? Well not according to your definition of fairness.

Your definition of fairness is...
- Not everyone needs to have the same opportunity
- But everyone should follow the same rules

Applying the whites-only voting system, I conform to your definition of fairness.

The rules of this voting system is "you need to be white". This rule applies equally to everyone. Of course not everyone has the same chance to be white, but that doesn't matter according to your definition.

I see it as fair because anyone that meets the criteria has an equal chance of being chosen

You're forgetting one fact: God gave them these qualities. God gave them the qualities needed to get into heaven, and now he rewards them for it. God could have given these qualities to everyone, but he didn't. This is unfair

and He doesn't exclude those that meet his standards based on skin colour or sex

No he excludes those based on where they were born. How is that any different.

- you have no control over your sex
- you have no control over your skin color
- you have no control over whether you are born into a Christian home or a Muslim home

Since its a gift not a right, I don't personally see God as being "unfair" in choosing certain individuals available at the time needed.

It being a gift does not make it automatically fair. If I had two children but only gave gifts to one of them every birthday and Christmas, I would be an unfair parent

That is true at the moment. For that reason, I believe the bible which presents a resurrection. This will mean that everyone will be given an equal opportunity to learn about Jesus and his kingdom and decide if they want to live in this new world or not.

Who would decide against this? Who would choose death over an eternity in heaven?

Keep in mind, the dilemma of the moral atheist is exclusive to moral atheists. They already desire justice so they would not turn this down out of their own pride or wickedness. Every single moral atheist would accept this new world, so why put them through this trial? Why not take them directly to heaven? We are once again back to the issue of why is unbelief condemnable when everyone ends up as a believer eventually?

In the bible, faith/belief is much more than simply accepting that there is a Creator. Atheism is a type of disbelief, sure but someone can accept that there is a creator but still decide they do not "believe" God's way of doing things is the best way, they do not "believe" he should tell them what to do, they do not "believe" a system where humans have to submit to higher rule if they are perfect, in short, biblically you can accept there is a God and still be without faith/belief.

You are redefining the word to fit your agenda. This is nothing but confirmation bias through selective interpretation.

Your redefinition of the word "belief" is basically the same as "agree". So why does the Bible not just say "agree"? You would think God would foresee these confusions in his choice of words.

You are being inconsistent. Here you define "unbelief" as "not agreeing with God's standards", yet atheism is merely those who do not believe in the existence of God. An atheist is not someone who does not agree with God's standards. An atheist may well agree with God's standards but do not believe he exists. Yet in post 125, you said atheists do not go to heaven, implying you define "unbelief" as "not believing in God's existence" (as this is the definition of atheism). So if it's only their standards that matter as opposed to their belief in God's existence, why do atheists not go to heaven (as per post 125)? Why do only Christians go to heaven (as per post 130)?

For example, the bible explains that demons [rebellious angels] believe there is a Creator, ie demons are not atheists, but this does not mean they accept to live by that one's standards.

This would be considered an immoral believer. I never implied they do not exist nor did I imply they go to heaven. I specifically mentioned immoral Christians as those who will get death.

This however doesn't mean he (Satan) has "faith" in God, he doesn't respect God, he doesn't wish to obey God and he doesn't want to live according to the (heiratical) system of God.

Satan isn't in hell for his unbelief. He's in hell for all the other evil he has done. No one ever accused Satan for being an unbeliever.

People that are allowed or are resurrected to life will not logically after that moment be atheists. But whether they choose, after being given time and opportunity to learn about the True God, to willingly live according to that one's standards, (ie in biblical terms whether they choose to have faith in that God) is another matter.

Then why did you say atheists do not go to heaven? No one will be an atheist in the end, so your claim that "atheists do not go to heaven" is pointless as no atheists will exist.

[Justin108]

[Replying to post 153 by ttruscott]
You haven't replied to my responses yet. Do you intend to?

[Claire Evans]

Yes, I believe God takes all of these things into account, but in order to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, everyone has to feel remorse. They need to repent.

And what about the matter of belief? According to Mark 16:16 and Revelation 21:8, those who do not believe are condemned and cast into the lake of fire.

But it doesn't mean that those who didn't believe in Jesus in this life will be condemned in the next life if they got the opportunity to see the truth in death. Is the litter girl in deepest, darkest Africa going to hell for not ever knowing who Jesus was?

I rather like John's verse:

Excuse me but it's not a matter of what you like, it's a matter of what's in the Bible. John's verse doesn't make Mark and Revelations go away.

I believe it all depends on how one interprets things.

John 3:36
Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life. Whoever rejects the Son will not see life. Instead, the wrath of God remains on him."

Rejecting the Son is rejecting all good. I believe non-believers are equated with those who reject Jesus. Nobody rejects Jesus out of ignorance. As you say, there are many who have not been born into Christian households. Some don't even know He exists! So non believers say, "Well, I've rejected Jesus because I don't believe He existed or that He is the Son of God." It is the rejection of Jesus when one knows fully who Jesus is that is the unpardonable sin.

This interpretation might have been valid if you look at John 3:36 in isolation, but paired with Mark 16:16 and Revelations 21:8, it clearly says "unbelievers" and not merely "those who reject Christ". If the Bible merely said "those who reject Christ" then you may have had a point, but the Bible specifically mentions "unbelievers" which means those who have never heard of Jesus is not excluded from this as they are still classified as "unbelievers" and is therefore condemned by both Mark 16:16 and Revelations 21:8.

In Galations chapter 2, Paul writes:

“Behold, you are called a Jew (Judean – Believer) and you rest in the law, and make your boast of God, (You claim to be a follower of God)

“And are confident that you yourself are a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness. . . (You claim to be teaching the truth of God)

“You therefore which teach another, do not teach yourself? You that preach that a man should not seal, do you steal?

“You say a man should not commit adultery, do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you commit sacrilege?

“You who make your boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonor God? (You claim to be a follower of God, but you break the law and bring dishonor on God.)

“For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles (Unbelievers) through you, as it is written.

“For circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law: but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision has become uncircumcision.

Therefore, if the uncircumcision (the Unbelievers) keep the righteous requirements of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision? (Those who you consider Unbelievers – heathen – are more righteous than you are. You boast that you are of the circumcision, but circumcision – a cutting off of the flesh - is only meant to be an outward sign of a pure heart – which you do not have.)

One can claim to be a believer but they really are not. Some non believers behave better than the believers. In fact, Jesus said in Matthew 7:

…21Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. 22Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ 23Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness.’…

So the Lord will tell some believers to depart!

Matthew 15:

21 Leaving that place, Jesus withdrew to the region of Tyre and Sidon. 22 A Canaanite woman from that vicinity came to Him, crying out, “Lord, Son of David, have mercy on me! My daughter is suffering terribly from demon-possession.�

23 Jesus did not answer a word. So his disciples came to Him and urged Him, “Send her away, for she keeps crying out after us.� 24 He answered, “I was only sent to the lost sheep of Israel.�

25 The woman came and knelt before Him. “Lord, help me!� she said. 26 He replied, “It is not right to take the children’s bread and toss it to their dogs.� 27 “Yes, Lord,� she said, “but even the dogs eat the crumbs that fall from their master’s table.�

27 Then Jesus answered, “Woman, you have great faith! Your request is granted.� And her daughter was healed from that very hour.

So we can see that the Canaanite woman obviously wasn't a believer but when she saw Him, she believed. Who's to say that this wouldn't be the case with an atheist today should they know Him? If the Canaanite woman had never met Jesus, thus could never have the chance to believe, would she be sent to hell? How can a lack of opportunity be held against someone?

What about the murderer on the cross? When He saw the truth that was Jesus, He repented. What would have happened if that criminal had died a day before Jesus and didn't get the chance to repent? Would He have gone to hell? No, Jesus knows who would repent if they had the opportunity to know Him.

An infant does not have the ability to choose between right and wrong. Nobody truly knows what happens. Does the child resurrect as an infant not having the capability of even knowing God? It is a mystery. As for us, it is only right that evil needs to be punished. There are shades of grey in life. God being fair, will always take it into account.

Logically speaking, there are only two possible outcomes to an infant death: either they go to heaven or they go to hell.

If they go to heaven, it is unfair as they never had to undergo the trials we do.
If they go to hell, it is unfair as they were never given a chance.

Either way, God is unfair.

Babies can't go to hell. They have never committed sin. Would not a fair God understand the trials we go through? You make things out to black and white in this life when it is not. The irony is that God doesn't send us to hell. People do. Hell is the complete separation from God from what I understand and if someone clings onto their sin, what can God do about it? He has to withdraw from their presence. I think you'd consider it very unfair if the evil went unpunished.

It means we all have an equal chance because Jesus wants to save all sinners. That is, the least righteous of them all. Therefore, wouldn't a God who loves us all equally be fair?

You are essentially using the fact that Jesus called himself fair as proof that he is fair. If his actions prove otherwise, his claim is useless. All Luke 15:7 tells us is that God is particularly happy when a sinner repents and goes to heaven. This doesn't say anything about whether everyone has an equal chance. If a man in a wheelchair escapes a burning building, I will be particularly happy. But my happiness over his survival does not mean he had an equal chance at escaping the burning building.

It is what we can infer. Would not a fair God give everyone an equal chance. Then why did Jesus die for all of us? We are talking about spiritual issues not things like the wheelchair analogy. That analogy has nothing to do with forgiveness and repentance.

[JehovahsWitness]

The dilemma is, a perfect world has no goals that need to be achieved. There is no work to be done, no orders to be given.

That may well be your idea of a perfect world but it is not the biblical one. All I am saying is this is what the bible presents as the paradise, a world were people have fulfilling work, directives to follow and a government to obey. Again, I agree you may not see that as "perfect" but it is indeed how life on the promised earthly paradise, as presented in scripture will be organized and what I personally believe to be true.

For example, the bible speaks about individuals buidling and harvesting in the new world. Even perfect wheat has to be harvested. If the harvest is a collective effort directives will need to be communicated as to time and place and what each individual will specifically be doing. That is one example of work (and the need for organisations and directives, in a perfect world according to the bible)

Again I recognize that the "perfect world" of the bible is totally different from the one you yourself imagine.


Artists impression of working in a perfect world (Paradise)*

They will certainly build houses and have occupancy; and they will certainly plant vineyards and eat their fruitage. They will not build and someone else have occupancy; they will not plant and someone else do the eating. For like the days of a tree will the days of my people be; and the work of their own hands my chosen ones will use to the full.� (Isaiah 65:21, 22)

*I would like to note this is just an artists impression, I am not claiming there are pictures in the bible, but that the artists has read scriptures of the new world and in his imagination created the image above.

- Wait... so people can die in paradise if they do not work? [...] Do you have scripture to support your claim that we will need to work to survive in paradise?

I said something wrong earlier I would like to admit that and correct it. I was wrong to not pick up on the statement "work to survive" and say "yes". I was wrong to imply that if they didn't work they would die - that was not my intention, I apologise for the error.

People in paradise will need to eat and drink in order not to die, the work will be what I believe they will need to do to live happily. I believe that having a purpose and satisfying work to exercise the mind and body are a part of what we need to be happy. The bible speaks of people working and enjoying the results of their work (see above) I cannot go beyond scripture and say what will happen to an individual that wants to live in this new world but never do work; I hope that clears up my personal beliefs on this.





RELATED POSTS

Will people work in paradise?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 34#p796534

Will people build and live in houses in paradise?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 71#p915971

Will people suffer from hunger on the paradise EARTH?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 75#p878675

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE KINGDOM, THE MILLENIUM and ...THE EARTHLY PARADISE

[JehovahsWitness]

So back to a heavenly hierarchy: what is the function of the leaders? What do they do? What kind of orders do they give? What do they mean to achieve? .

I would imagine like all governements the function of the leaders ("kings") will be there to oversee the education, housing, and all other practical aspects of living in an organised social structure.

What do they do? Like all leaders I believe they will issue directives, give instructions, establish laws and provide guidelines; issue judgements, make decisions to ensure the smooth application of the above, in short, give orders to the people in order to maintain order and prosperity.

What kind of orders do they give? I cannot be specific because I do not know exactly how the new world will be organized, the bible doesn't give specifics about things such as how much technology we will have, how housing or food will be supplied, what specific laws and regulations will be in place ... I believe that on these specifics we will have to wait and see.

What do they mean to achieve? Ultimately the goal is to guide mankind back to existing as God originally purposed, perfect humans living in total harmony both with the planet and with their God, this as I mentioned will take according to scripture 1000 years to achieve.

Once this has been achieved all leadership will be handed back to God.

Why does God need a hierarchy of authority? The only reason there is a chain of hierarchy in this world is because the king is finite in his capabilities. He cannot personally oversee everything, and so he appoints others who will do this. To God, this is unnecessary. He can personally oversee everything with no effort. So why assign a hierarchy?

Sure, according to scripture God doesn't "need" anything or anyone to achieve his purpose. However evidently he has chosen to delegate responsibilities. This scripturally speaking is because he knows this will be viewed as the recients as a great joy and privilege.

To illustrate: A man is working on his car. He doesn't need his little boy to help him, indeed he could probably get the job done faster and more efficiently without his son; still he knows that handing each tool to his father and spending time with him will bring them both pleasure. The son is proud to be "working" with his dad and as he (the son) does so he learns more about the work and how his father does things.

I a similar way, I believe personally that the God of the bible dignifies his intelligent creation with work, authority, responsibilities and works along with them to reenforce their unity and give them pleasure.


JW


RELATED POSTS

Will people work in paradise?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 34#p796534

Will people build and live in houses in paradise?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 71#p915971

Will people suffer from hunger on the paradise EARTH?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 75#p878675

To learn more please go to other posts related to...

THE KINGDOM, THE MILLENIUM and ...THE EARTHLY PARADISE

[JehovahsWitness]

Earlier you said...

God never intended any intelligent being (even perfect) to exist without someone above them in terms of authority

Why does a perfect entity need authority? Authority only serves to keep those under them in order. A perfect entity left to his own accords will not turn to disorder because the entity is perfect. If the entity were to turn to disorder, then this would be an imperfect entity.

I suppose that would depend on what you mean by "perfect". In the bible the word "perfect" means complete, as in "completely fulfilling/doing what it was created to do"; a perfect fish cannot fly and a perfect ant cannot crush an elephant.

To illustrate (and mix my metaphors): A "perfect" ball biblically speaking would be one without defect, absolutely round. Would that mean that a perfect ball should be able to dance the macarena? It can (in its perfection) still only do what it was created to do. Like the ball that will perfectly follow gravity because of its perfectly round form when put on a slope, when placed on the earth humans, even perfect humans will roll down out of balance if not given the balanced structure they were created for. This is no more a sign of "imperfection" than a ball rolling down a hill is a sign that the ball has a defect. Humans were not created to successfully rule themselves and left to their own devices (without suitable rulership) will go "downhill" and the result will be suffering in one form or another.