That is not correct question but lets stick to it. If we don’t have divine wisdom then we don’t understand right from wrong from our perspectives. Therefore we are in danger of performing wrong act which we are not responsible for it.In that case, you are asking the wrong question. You would be better off asking, “can we understand divine wisdom?” and the answer would be no. Our ability to assess divine wisdom is impaired.
Well, yeah. He has all the right and cannot be questioned. I am not happy with that. You can be happy with that.Asking about divine justice is incorrect, because the very meaning of tyranny or opression is infringing on the rights and ownership of others, but this cannot be attributed to Allah as He has dominion and ownership over all things, thus He has the right to take what He owns.
*
He is not questioned about what He does, but they will be questioned.* -Surah 21, Ayat 23
Whether you personally feel ‘happy’ about it, is irrelevant to the truth of the matter. Regardless of how you feel, it remains true.That is not correct question but lets stick to it. If we don’t have divine wisdom then we don’t understand right from wrong from our perspectives. Therefore we are in danger of performing wrong act which we are not responsible for it.
Well, yeah. He has all the right and cannot be questioned. I am not happy with that. You can be happy with that.
You didn’t answer to my main objection.Whether you personally feel ‘happy’ about it, is irrelevant to the truth of the matter. Regardless of how you feel, it remains true.
We are responsible for our actions, as I have pointed out a few times that we have the free will of acquiring the actions created by Allah.You didn’t answer to my main objection.
Do you believe that we are rational beings? If yes, then you would agree that we always do things which are rational in given circumstances. How should we be responsible for any rational act even if the act was against divine justice?We are responsible for our actions, as I have pointed out a few times that we have the free will of acquiring the actions created by Allah.
Are you implying that whenever we act, we always believe it to be the right thing to do? If so, you are clearly out of touch with reality.Do you believe that we are rational beings? If yes, then you would agree that we always do things which are rational in given circumstances. How should we be responsible for any rational act even if the act was against divine justice?
Yes, we always decide given circumstances.Are you implying that whenever we act, we always believe it to be the right thing to do? If so, you are clearly out of touch with reality.
That is simply untrue. At times, people act without thinking. Others, do something wrong whilst knowing it’s wrong. It is the divine will and our contingent nature.Yes, we always decide given circumstances.
Moreover what allows us to perform a irrational act if we are rational?
What allows us to perform a irrational act if we are rational?That is simply untrue. At times, people act without thinking. Others, do something wrong whilst knowing it’s wrong. It is the divine will and our contingent nature.
Another rush to reply. You obviously didn’t read my post. I said it is the divine will and our contingent nature.What allows us to perform a irrational act if we are rational?
How contingent nature comes to play? Why we should be responsible for acting irrational because of having contingent nature? I thought that you would answer free will anyway.Another rush to reply. You obviously didn’t read my post. I said it is the divine will and our contingent nature.
I already replied that he conveyed his thoughts through his prophets/Jesus/Church. They get written down in case people forget or war gets in the way or any other reasons. His sense of Divine Justice is not an abstract that uniformly exist naturally in everyone one’s mind and that everyone’s comprehension is exactly alike. The 10 commandments were written in stone and delivered. Jesus conveyed verbal commandments to his apostles. He didn’t say read my mind. Many of his apostles were so wooden headed anyway initially.Your example is just about delivering divine laws rather than communicating His sense of Divine Justice.
Great. So you believe that we can understand Divine Justice as human being. Why do we need messenger then? Even Atheist have access to Divine Justice.I already replied that he conveyed his thoughts through his prophets/Jesus/Church. They get written down in case people forget or war gets in the way or any other reasons. His sense of Divine Justice is not an abstract that uniformly exist naturally in everyone one’s mind and that everyone’s comprehension is exactly alike. The 10 commandments were written in stone and delivered. Jesus conveyed verbal commandments to his apostles. He didn’t say read my mind. Many of his apostles were so wooden headed anyway initially.
You can not avoid the requirement of the messengers to convey the message of Divine Justice. Divine Justice that exist in the mind of God that does not get transmitted to his people is of no value at all since it is not effected. Simply put, who can read God’s mind? We couldn’t even comply consistently even if he appeared to us. Which he did. One is good for awhile and then we start thinking of violating his Divine Justice by claiming “he wants me to be happy. So I do the things that make me happy.” Or he is merciful, he will forgive me for being bad. If he is not merciful, then he is not worthy to be my God. Or some nonsensical excuse like that. You see such excuses everywhere today for doing things expressly forbidden in Holy Writ.
Divine Justice that gets conveyed/parabelized/taught/commanded is simply expressions of God’s sense of justice/logic. Calling them Divine Law is a simple way of tagging it. Similarly, a country’s constitution that exist in the minds of the nation founders is as good as nil without a group of lawmakers expressing the intent of the Constitution and codifying/writing it down.
You misread me. Without a messenger, we will not know of what God’s Divine Justice is. You have not make a case of how one know of Divine Justice in the first place in the absence of a messenger(s). In the example of the atheist that you quoted, how would the atheist know:Great. So you believe that we can understand Divine Justice as human being. Why do we need messenger then? Even Atheist have access to Divine Justice.
Justice to me is that ability to distinguish right from wrong. The next point is that if we understand Divine Justice from a messenger then we should be able to understand it on our own.You misread me. Without a messenger, we will not know of what God’s Divine Justice is. You have not make a case of how one know of Divine Justice in the first place in the absence of a messenger(s). In the example of the atheist that you quoted, how would the atheist know:
- what Justice is
- and that it is from God i.e. Divine
We might need to drop the word Divine if eventually there is no difference between our justice and God’s Justice (when we evolve well).You just jump straight to the conclusion that everyone knows what Divine Justice is or that it is identical for everyone. If an atheist is a non-God believer, he would not know the meaning of Divine at all since it does not exist in his world. In the case of a multi-gods believer, he would not know which god’s justice to obey if they differ. In some cases, one’s sense of justice is personal, although they may claim in the name of God or justify using some perverse logic for their actions.
We are either able to understand right from wrong or not (like understanding mathematics). We could eventually understand Justice if are able too otherwise a messenger cannot help us either.You need to justify how the knowledge of Divine Justice get known by the person in the absence of a messenger. We will be going round in circles if we don’t have an answer to this.
You have not proved that your sense of justice is Divine or that you know what defines Divine Justice. Nor have you proven to show that you know what is right/wrong or that your version of right/wrong is superior to another person’s version of right/wrong.Justice to me is that ability to distinguish right from wrong.
If the messenger explains to me, I understand his POV. In the absence of the messenger, I won’t. My sense of justice pertains to me only and it is my POV not God.The next point is that if we understand Divine Justice from a messenger then we should be able to understand it on our own.
You won’t know if you don’t have anything to compare against.We might need to drop the word Divine if eventually there is no difference between our justice and God’s Justice (when we evolve well).
You are confused. A messenger informs and teaches. Whether one cares to listen or decide to modify or invent new ideas is a separate matter. In the first case, the messenger has certain POV of certain rights/wrongs. In the modified/invented second case, the person decided that he likes his own version better. And you are right the messenger can not help if one decides to forge one’s own path to define what is wrong/right for himself.We are either able to understand right from wrong or not (like understanding mathematics). We could eventually understand Justice if are able too otherwise a messenger cannot help us either.
I just tried to give a definition of justice.You have not proved that your sense of justice is Divine or that you know what defines Divine Justice. Nor have you proven to show that you know what is right/wrong or that your version of right/wrong is superior to another person’s version of right/wrong.
A messenger like a teacher just facilitates understanding.If the messenger explains to me, I understand his POV. In the absence of the messenger, I won’t. My sense of justice pertains to me only and it is my POV not God.
Why justice is related to comparing?You won’t know if you don’t have anything to compare against.
The process of teaching is useless if we don’t have the ability to understand a topic.You are confused. A messenger informs and teaches. Whether one cares to listen or decide to modify or invent new ideas is a separate matter. In the first case, the messenger has certain POV of certain rights/wrongs. In the modified/invented second case, the person decided that he likes his own version better. And you are right the messenger can not help if one decides to forge one’s own path to define what is wrong/right for himself.
You haven’t even touch on what justice is, or how it came about, or how your sense of justice came about. You are still at the starting block.I just tried to give a definition of justice.
Not just facilitate. I am indeed surprise that is how you view teachers. The teacher is a source of knowledge. Unless when you first started school, you knew everything there is to know and the teacher is just for show. The teacher performs several roles. He imparts new knowledge, he motivates, he challenges, he guides.A messenger like a teacher just facilitates understanding.
Please look at your previous post. You just attempted to compare your justice vs Divine.Why justice is related to comparing?
Why jump to that conclusion? You haven’t even attempted to prove we don’t have that ability to learn. Most likely, after we learnt it, is is just too “inconvenient” to comply. If you understand laws, you already understood. If you don’t like the laws, that’s a different topic entirely.The process of teaching is useless if we don’t have the ability to understand a topic.
I already have defined what justice is: The ability to distinguish right from wrong. What is right? Something that you and other agree upon.You haven’t even touch on what justice is, or how it came about, or how your sense of justice came about. You are still at the starting block.
Yes, but we gather the knowledge that a teacher teaches from the scratch. We couldn’t gather the knowledge if we really didn’t have the ability to understand.Not just facilitate. I am indeed surprise that is how you view teachers. The teacher is a source of knowledge. Unless when you first started school, you knew everything there is to know and the teacher is just for show. The teacher performs several roles. He imparts new knowledge, he motivates, he challenges, he guides.
What I am trying to say is that the Divine Justice (justice from God point of view) shouldn’t be different from justice (justice from our point of view) if we can comprehend Divine Justice.Please look at your previous post. You just attempted to compare your justice vs Divine.
Could a cow understand logic? No. Could a human understand logic? yes. Therefore it is useless to try to teach logic to a cow.Why jump to that conclusion? You haven’t even attempted to prove we don’t have that ability to learn. Most likely, after we learnt it, is is just too “inconvenient” to comply. If you understand laws, you already understood. If you don’t like the laws, that’s a different topic entirely.