Why? What's the point - especially if they essentially a different person.
My claim is that they are essentially the same person. Same affinites, same aversions, fresh start.
So the Child murderer still remembers all the children he killed, and has the urge to kill again, and the victims still remember being killed.
No, the child murderer doesn't remember; the victim doesn't remember. The murderer may still have the affinity for murder, but they have the opportunity to turn away from those behaviors.
But most people don't "turn away from evil" because they have no evil to turn away from. So god has engineered a world of suffering just so that a few damaged individuals might be able to resist their dangerous urges, and many innocents suffer as part of the experiment.
Seems reasonable.
IMV it's a complicated system with a lot of moving parts. In my opinion it's easier to seperate the issue of evil acts from the issue of suffering. For the evil person, they maybe punished for their actions, we simply don't know. Maybe there is a reason God doesn't interfere, we simply don't know. For the issue of suffering, we don't know if the victim is innocent and there is an opportunity to overcome their circumstances which will be greatly rewarded. It's more complex than I think you are granting to it.
And why are most people generally good while some are sadistic psychopaths?
We're are all flawed, some much more than the majority. It could be these sadistic psychopaths are the product of their environment.
So why not just create everyone as generally good and don't create any monsters?
The challenge to remain faithful would be less, the reward would be less. God wants to reward us greatly for remaining faithful in spite of the monsters in the world.
Sorry, didn't realise you believe in reincarnation and karma. I thought you said you we're Jewish.
Yes, I'm Jewish. In my community we believe in reincarnation and a version of karma called midda-keneged-midda.
So someone else has to become a child murderer in order to balance the scales. So then they get murdered in their next life. And so the cycle of violence and suffering continues. Surely it would be easier for god to just not create any people who want to murder children in the first place?
The cycle continues until the murderer moderates their violent impulses. Yes it would be easier to create the world without the murderer, but it would also be easier to omit humans altogther. Would that be better in your opinion?
Based on what?
If I had reason to believe that the babysitter might be a child abuser, I would not leave my child with them and hope that they weren't.
I think you're stretching the argument beyond its usefulness. We are not talking about leaving the child in the care of a known abuser. What we're talking about is why to worship a God who does not interfere with abuse, murder, etc. Your example doesn't fit for me, sorry.
But god's charted has been repeatedly put on trial, and he always seems to be guilty. Do you mean that he is innocent until you accept he is guilty?
I see you've given an example later in your post, I'll try to address this there. In general, though I maintain that there is too little information to judge.
More things have died than are alive today, but that isn't the point.
If god is the abusive monster he seems to be, he would want people to live and suffer rather than just die.
Yes, but that's not what I said. I said when I look around I see more living things than dead things. If God were malevolent life would be worse. Think about it, the way that the dead decompose and feed new life is much better than no decomposition and being surrounded by dead bodies and carcasses. If God were a sadistic monster, why not create a world where we are surrounded by death?
But it should be much, much better.
It's almost as if a lot of the stuff that happens in the world is random rather than planned.
Sure, it could be random, I'm not sure how that effects our discussion.
The Torah gives us the information that god condones slavery. Therefore we can judge that god as morally deficient.
Unless abolishing slavery at that time would result in a worse situation.
