Reciprocity

[Rival]

Okay I see this thread is going nowhere



Have a nice Shabbos, @Tumah!

 

[Tumah]

yes and you are repeating the same action by simply looking at compensatory damages. try going a bit higher. instead of damaging two people, why not positively reward just ONE. a rich man that can afford to pay the price of an eye; isn't going to have a problem with doing it again. there has to be some corrective measure, for the negative behavior to be modified.

Its not a corrective measure, its a compensatory one. Whatever measures you take to correct the aggressor, at the end of the day he still needs to compensate for what he did. Its not a punitive measure. He incurred a debt to the other guy that needs to be paid.

take away someone's freewill. force them to look at the monkey in the mirror of their own private mansion in our father's house. you're doing the rich man a favor. sooner or later, he's going to have recognize himself as God; if he's going to use his power to harm other's not as self.

Why not just talk normally?

I AM that i am

Your are... your name?

 

[Reggie Miller II]

Does an eye for an eye work?

Hello. No it does not. The law was the schoolmaster who brought us to Christ. Love and mercy works, keeping track of transgressions and revenge do not.

 

[Fool]

Its not a corrective measure, its a compensatory one. Whatever measures you take to correct the aggressor, at the end of the day he still needs to compensate for what he did. Its not a punitive measure. He incurred a debt to the other guy that needs to be paid.

Micah 6:8 “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness (or mercy), and to walk humbly with your God?”

Why not just talk normally?

this is normal. there is an indefinite way of describing something. parroting something isn't the same as understanding the idea.

a person could paste verse after verse but that doesn't indicate the person understands the gist of what is being conveyed.

Your are... your name?

I AM a mirror of self, godlings.

 

[rusra02]

Even though it's inherently hypocritical?

One of the main objectives of criminal law is to express which actions are considered unacceptable. It's hypocritical to try to say "this act is unacceptable" by committing the exact same act yourself.

I do not believe maliciously murdering a person is the same act as the bringing of just punishment on the murderer for his crime. More importantly, God did not condemn judges in Israel from following the Law requiring like for like.

 

[rusra02]

And, typical;ly, that is old testament stuff, from the Jewish Torah, not the new testament which came to be allegedly because God realized that the old testament literal messages were not working and instead gave the message of love.

Yes, I agree this Law was given to only the Jews. But it required the Jews to "love your neighbor as yourself." Jesus said this was the second greatest commandment, right after loving Jehovah whole-souled. The Bible's message has always been that of love and justice.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I do not believe maliciously murdering a person is the same act as the bringing of just punishment on the murderer for his crime.

You're begging the question by describing the punishment as "just".

More importantly, God did not condemn judges in Israel from following the Law requiring like for like.

Then your god is a hypocrite, too.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

The Bible's message has always been that of love and justice.

"40 As the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather from his kingdom everything that causes sin as well as all lawbreakers.42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. The one who has ears had better listen!"

This is "love and justice" to you?

 

[rusra02]

"40 As the weeds are collected and burned with fire, so it will be at the end of the age. 41 The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather from his kingdom everything that causes sin as well as all lawbreakers.42 They will throw them into the fiery furnace, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth. 43 Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. The one who has ears had better listen!"

This is "love and justice" to you?

I believe the "weeds" being thrown into the fiery furnace means their destruction. Matthew 13:30 says; "Let both grow together until the harvest, and in the harvest season, I will tell the reapers: First collect the weeds and bind them in bundles to burn them up; then gather the wheat into my storehouse.’" Yes, IMO such destruction of wicked ones is justice, and shows love for their innocent victims and potential victims.

 

[Milton Platt]

I believe Jehovah's qualities of justice and mercy are perfectly balanced. Jehovah followed his own law of equivalence to provide the perfect sacrifice for sin, the human life of his perfect son Jesus. (Matthew 20:28) IMO, the value of Jesus life, given in sacrifice, allows Jehovah the legal basis to forgive repentant sinners for even very serious sins. At the same time, God has promised to bring "vengeance on those who do not know God and those who do not obey the good news about our Lord Jesus. These very ones will undergo the judicial punishment of everlasting destruction." (2 Thessalonians 1:8,9) Justice and mercy, perfectly balanced.

He did not give his life, he was supposedly resurrected, therefore he is still alive.

There is not "balancing" about it. Christians state that he is perfectly just and perfectly merciful. Mercy requires the suspension of justice, and visa versa. He cannot be both and maybe he is neither.....
How do you know the god you imagine to exist is not just running a number on you???

 

[Milton Platt]

justice isn't about exacting revenge. it's about creating balance. this is the reason the balance is held higher than the sword. the sword is also double-edged because it cuts both ways. defense is allowable, offense isn't.

It has nothing to do with defense or offence. It has to do with people stating that they believe in a god which is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful at the same time. Mercy is the suspension of justice.

 

[Fool]

It has nothing to do with defense or offence. It has to do with people stating that they believe in a god which is both perfectly just and perfectly merciful at the same time. Mercy is the suspension of justice.

No because Laodicea literally means justice of the people. That is what a comforter is. An advocate for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised, and marginalized. Being unmerciful to you neighbor is met with defense. I require mercy, not sacrifice. You can't give to God what already is from God, is God.


case in point:

rev 22:12

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

you reap what you sow.

 

[Milton Platt]

No because Laodicea literally means justice of the people. That is what a comforter is. An advocate for the poor, downtrodden, disenfranchised, and marginalized. Being unmerciful to you neighbor is met with defense. I require mercy, not sacrifice. You can't give to God what already is from God, is God.


case in point:

rev 22:12

And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

you reap what you sow.

We seem to be talking past each other (like THAT has never happened on the RF before LOL) When I originally posted to this thread, it was to just say that you cannot have a god that is both perfectly merciful and perfectly just at the same time, because mercy is the suspension of justice and visa versa. Not that everyone who believes in the Christian god would say he has both attributes, but it seems the predominate view. I was not addressing the action between people, but between god and people.

 

[1137]

Does an eye for an eye work?

Eye for an eye basically means fair justice, punishment fits the crime. It's also a type of retributivism. I do agree that crime and punishment should match as closely as possible.

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Even though it's inherently hypocritical?

One of the main objectives of criminal law is to express which actions are considered unacceptable. It's hypocritical to try to say "this act is unacceptable" by committing the exact same act yourself.

So, say the crime is kidnapping/holding someone against their will?

Prison?

 

[rusra02]

He did not give his life, he was supposedly resurrected, therefore he is still alive.

There is not "balancing" about it. Christians state that he is perfectly just and perfectly merciful. Mercy requires the suspension of justice, and visa versa. He cannot be both and maybe he is neither.....
How do you know the god you imagine to exist is not just running a number on you???

He gave his perfect human life in sacrifice. He was resurrected as the spirit person he was before he came as a man to provide the ransom. I believe Jehovah can and does forgive sins on the basis of Christ's sacrifice. This shows God's love and mercy. His justice is displayed by the way he made this possible, IMO, by providing the legal basis to forgive sins. Jehovah has provided ample evidence to convince me he is the only true God, worthy of my absolute confidence.

 

[Milton Platt]

He gave his perfect human life in sacrifice. He was resurrected as the spirit person he was before he came as a man to provide the ransom. I believe Jehovah can and does forgive sins on the basis of Christ's sacrifice. This shows God's love and mercy. His justice is displayed by the way he made this possible, IMO, by providing the legal basis to forgive sins. Jehovah has provided ample evidence to convince me he is the only true God, worthy of my absolute confidence.

Not buying that flawed line of reasoning. If the "he" was not the thing that died, then the death was not legitimate.