Why doesn't God punish all sinners?

[The Transcended Omniverse]

When there are sick children who die early of age, this is claimed to be God's way of punishing them since they were in sin. Yet, we see people living in far worse sin. We see rich, happy, uncaring people living in fancy mansions. But it seems as though these people don't get punished at all. They live the entirety of their lives in a luxurious quality with hardly anything bad happening to them. They hardly have any life threatening situations and they hardly have any suffering and misery in their lives.

This whole concept also applies to people who claimed to have Jesus/God revealed to them. Why is it that God chooses to punish only certain types of people and why is it that he only chooses to reveal himself to certain people? There are people who hardly put in any work to receive Jesus into their lives while there are people who work their whole entire lives and never have such a revelation. Doesn't this make God unfair since he only chooses certain types of people to punish and reveal himself to?

 

[Kemosloby]

I think everything is mostly random, since for some reason God doesn't want proof of his existence. If everything went tit for tat it would be too obvious. But the judgement day is still coming, to even all the scores.

 

[CogentPhilosopher]

When there are sick children who die early of age, this is claimed to be God's way of punishing them since they were in sin.

By whom?

I have known a lot of Christians, Jews, Muslims, and Baha'i and some of them had some pretty, in my opinion, immoral beliefs but I have yet to know of one that has claimed that.

 

[Aiviu]

When there are sick children who die early of age, this is claimed to be God's way of punishing them since they were in sin. Yet, we see people living in far worse sin. We see rich, happy, uncaring people living in fancy mansions. But it seems as though these people don't get punished at all. They live the entirety of their lives in a luxurious quality with hardly anything bad happening to them. They hardly have any life threatening situations and they hardly have any suffering and misery in their lives.

This whole concept also applies to people who claimed to have Jesus/God revealed to them. Why is it that God chooses to punish only certain types of people and why is it that he only chooses to reveal himself to certain people? There are people who hardly put in any work to receive Jesus into their lives while there are people who work their whole entire lives and never have such a revelation. Doesn't this make God unfair since he only chooses certain types of people to punish and reveal himself to?

Do you blame the writer's writing or the reader's understanding? People still assume and believe that the writer's writing contain an explanational truth about God. But the words you trying to blame do not define God. The words are not even useful when someone tries to prove God. You didnt blame for what is written but for what you assumed to understand.

" With crayon you draw an image, but with words you can do the same. "

All words can draw an image from God. Everyone who see it will assume they'd understood and know. But these words are only about the path. The path to live and how to keep following. Eventually they'll find God and then they will see themself and how God see them. Everyone will recieve truth about themself. Whether what they think about themself had a part of the truth how they had lived.

Within you is God. And who is front of you, is within God. Those who speak within you are the path to find God.

 

[Valjean]

Why would a God 'punish'? What would be the point? What would it gain Him?

That sort of thing sounds more like a jealous, impulsive, vindictive child than the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the Universe.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

Yet, we see people living in far worse sin. We see rich, happy, uncaring people living in fancy mansions. But it seems as though these people don't get punished at all.

So is it the "rich", "happy" or "uncaring" part that is "sin" by your estimation? Should someone automatically be punished for being rich? Punished for being happy? Punished for living life care-free? Maybe it's the "fancy mansion(s)" that these people should be punished for? I kind of know what you are getting at, but you discredit yourself by so simply equating opulence, status and happy/care-free lifestyles with "sin." The equation is never that simple, and it is a naive mind that assumes that a "well-to-do" standing means the people sinned to get there, or are sinning like mad because now they have the money to sin any way they want, etc. I honestly don't even know how to describe the mind-set. It must be something like the witch-hunting villagers of old felt toward their targets. A blind disregard for the humanity of the target, and the only consideration being the assumptions put forth about their different lifestyle and choices.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Why would a God 'punish'? What would be the point? What would it gain Him?

That sort of thing sounds more like a jealous, impulsive, vindictive child than the omnipotent, omniscient creator of the Universe.

It's because I am talking about the biblical God here who would be the Christian God.

So is it the "rich", "happy" or "uncaring" part that is "sin" by your estimation? Should someone automatically be punished for being rich? Punished for being happy? Punished for living life care-free? Maybe it's the "fancy mansion(s)" that these people should be punished for? I kind of know what you are getting at, but you discredit yourself by so simply equating opulence, status and happy/care-free lifestyles with "sin." The equation is never that simple, and it is a naive mind that assumes that a "well-to-do" standing means the people sinned to get there, or are sinning like mad because now they have the money to sin any way they want, etc. I honestly don't even know how to describe the mind-set. It must be something like the witch-hunting villagers of old felt toward their targets. A blind disregard for the humanity of the target, and the only consideration being the assumptions put forth about their different lifestyle and choices.

This would be a sin because if these rich and happy people are not preaching the gospel, living in sinful pleasures and lust, seeking after their own passions and desires, etc., then that is sinful according to the biblical God and should be punished. But we don't see these rich and wealthy people being punished in the least bit.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

This would be a sin because if these rich and happy people are not preaching the gospel, living in sinful pleasures and lust, seeking after their own passions and desires, etc., then that is sinful according to the biblical God and should be punished. But we don't see these rich and wealthy people being punished in the least bit.

Do you attribute those things to all "rich" and "happy" people? Do you not bother to find out any details about them before making such hasty assumptions about their religious/spiritual lifestyles?

My ultimate point being that we need less of the automated judgment of circumstances in this world, not more. You don't help things by labeling people of wealth "sinful", "lustful", "selfish". You need to realize you probably know nearly nothing about them except that they have nice things.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Do you attribute those things to all "rich" and "happy" people? Do you not bother to find out any details about them before making such hasty assumptions about their religious/spiritual lifestyles?

My ultimate point being that we need less of the automated judgment of circumstances in this world, not more. You don't help things by labeling people of wealth "sinful", "lustful", "selfish". You need to realize you probably know nearly nothing about them except that they have nice things.

You make a blind assumption about me where you are thinking that I am only applying these attributes to rich, happy, and wealthy people. I am not. I am also applying these attributes to even poor and low class people who don't preach the gospel, live only for themselves and their own passions/pleasures, etc. I also don't attribute these personality traits to all rich and happy people either. That is also another blind assumption about me which I am not doing.

I am also using the Christian religion as a basis for my judgment. I am not doing any personal judgment on my part. I already realize that each person has their own personal views and religion. However, if Christianity is true, then I am going by this religion in basing my judgments as well as the questions I have.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You make a blind assumption about me where you are thinking that I am only applying these attributes to rich, happy, and wealthy people. I am not. I am also applying these attributes to even poor and low class people who don't preach the gospel, live only for themselves and their own passions/pleasures, etc. I also don't attribute these personality traits to all rich and happy people either. That is also another blind assumption about me which I am not doing.

First off, this was basically why I was asking in the first place, and I framed it up as me assuming you were saying those things from that mind-set for a couple of reasons:

1. YOU SAID IT. Here is a directly from your OP: "Yet, we see people living in far worse sin. We see rich, happy, uncaring people living in fancy mansions. But it seems as though these people don't get punished at all. " Tell me where those sentences qualify your view of rich people as being "sinful" only if they are not "preaching the gospel". Go ahead... point to the part that indicates that you aren't labeling all rich people under these assumptions. Can you?
2. FOR EFFECT. I wanted to make you see that your statements were made with an air of assumption... because... well... they were.

Again, your choice of words made it appear you were making assumptions. Just as you inferred that I was making assumptions about you with my choice of words. However, the difference is, my choice of words was intentional, yours was apparently just you being careless.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

First off, this was basically why I was asking in the first place, and I framed it up as me assuming you were saying those things from that mind-set for a couple of reasons:

1. YOU SAID IT. Here is a directly from your OP: "Yet, we see people living in far worse sin. We see rich, happy, uncaring people living in fancy mansions. But it seems as though these people don't get punished at all. " Tell me where those sentences qualify your view of rich people as being "sinful" only if they are not "preaching the gospel". Go ahead... point to the part that indicates that you aren't labeling all rich people under these assumptions. Can you?
2. FOR EFFECT. I wanted to make you see that your statements were made with an air of assumption... because... well... they were.

Again, your choice of words made it appear you were making assumptions. Just as you inferred that I was making assumptions about you with my choice of words. However, the difference is, my choice of words was intentional, yours was apparently just you being careless.

When you say a statement such as:

"We see cruel people out in this world. We seem them harm and torture others."

Now this statement does not indicate that all cruel people harm and torture others; only some. In that same sense, I was not implying that all rich and happy people are uncaring, seeking only after their own passion and pleasures, etc. Also, I am just going by what the Christian bible says. The bible says that it is always a sin to not preach the gospel regardless of who you are, where you are from, and what type of religious view you have. I myself am not a Christian believer. I am just having this discussion anyway since this is a religious debate forum after all.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

When you say a statement such as:

"We see cruel people out in this world. We seem them harm and torture others."

Now this statement does not indicate that all cruel people harm and torture others; only some. In that same sense, I was not implying that all rich and happy people are uncaring, seeking only after their own passion and pleasures, etc. Also, I am just going by what the Christian bible says. The bible says that it is always a sin to not preach the gospel regardless of who you are, where you are from, and what type of religious view you have. I myself am not a Christian believer. I am just having this discussion anyway since this is a religious debate forum after all.

Making the equation of "cruel people" with people who "harm and torture others" is much more justifiable. "Cruel" already means that they are affecting some other life-form in a negative way. Something harmful, otherwise it wouldn't be cruel. And to be cruel means you are purposefully so - torture is a descriptor easily applied to the actions of a cruel person.

But take your example above, and insert, instead, the subject and descriptors you used in the original post:

"We see rich people out in this world. We see them happy and going unpunished."

With the way you chose to word your original post this may as well be exactly what you said.

 

[The Transcended Omniverse]

Making the equation of "cruel people" with people who "harm and torture others" is much more justifiable. "Cruel" already means that they are affecting some other life-form in a negative way. Something harmful, otherwise it wouldn't be cruel. And to be cruel means you are purposefully so - torture is a descriptor easily applied to the actions of a cruel person.

But take your example above, and insert, instead, the subject and descriptors you used in the original post:

"We see rich people out in this world. We see them happy and going unpunished."

With the way you chose to word your original post this may as well be exactly what you said.

Cruel can also simply mean that they have a disgusting attitude and nothing more. In that same sense, rich can also mean that you simply have a lot of money and nothing more. It doesn't always mean that you are happy, living after your own passions, unpunished, etc.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Divine justice can be a comforting dream for the downtrodden. Of course, the downtrodden aren't generally all that concerned with evidence or basic logical consistency. They're usually too busy being downtrodden.

 

[Native]

"God" seems to be quite indifferent and absent over human troubles. It´s only a collective question of having human morality and responsibility.