Christianity & justice theory

saizai

Graduate Poster
S
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
1,374
In modern justice, you have basically one simple setup.

Person A does X. X is considered a Bad Thing to do. We have the following options:
1. forgive it
2. forgive it if A promises not to do it again
3. punish A
3a. as warning to others in the future
3b. as enforcement of a prior warning to ensure future warnings work (only slightly different)
3c. as an attempt at reforming A by making A really believe it was a Bad Thing
3d. as revenge / vengance to make A's victims feel better
3e. as entertainment
4. reform A psychologically / pharmacologically (semi-punishment)
5. sequester A from the community so they can only hurt themselves & other sequestees

It seems to me that the biblical historical sort of justice is heavily revenge-punishment based, and doesn't seem to care that much about reform. This is especially the case for "sin -> hell/heaven"; there is obviously no chance at reform in that case, nor for 3a-c, nor 3d-e except for the punishers (god?).

It is also strange to me that it phrases sins as being "against god" rather than against the people who were harmed - e.g. stealing is a sin against god, not against the person you steal from, and thus god is the one who has the right to seek revenge etc, and the only one you need to apologize to.

To be blunt, this seems to me to be a complete connerie and ineffective.

Questions:
1. How can it be justified? Perhaps I'm missing something and thus don't understand that really it is a good system after all.
2. How much has this shaped the real world justice system (even though the sociology and recidivism rates clearly indicate that this is a completely failed method)?
3. Why is it believed in anyway (as applied to the real world)? Many people still have very core assumptions that are based on this model (e.g. once you do X you are an Xer for life [unless you're "born again" :rolleyes:]; punishment-centered social interactions even w/ S.O.s; etc.)
 
You've already listed the prime reason for X-tian "justice" in 3e; you can NEVER underestimate the entertainment factor in X-tian punishment. That's how it's so easy to delight in someone else's misfortune (nevermind the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," thingie).

Disease, misfortune, poverty and all the things that make the world fun are punishment for sin when it's someone else - when "WE" suffer those ills, it's because, "God is testing us."

Think of the stoning scene in Monty Python's Life of Brian.
 
1. It was mainly justified as a means to cleanse the community in God's eyes.

2. This "revenge for God" based idea of justice pretty much dictated the european justice system up to the 17th century when natural justice started to replace it.

3. I'm not sure I understand your question. How is this model of thinking still being applied to the real world?

ETA: A slight correction

3d. as revenge / vengance for God
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The OT biblical approach to justice is very much of the "eye for an eye" variety of Deuteronomy and elswhere....but we shouldn't find it that surprising - tit-for-tat retaliation provides a simplistic framework within which a rudimentary justice system can operate - and fulfils both the "punishment" and "deterant" needs of society.....
 
There's also
6. Punish someone else, the more innocent the better.

You could make a case that the burnt offering of a sheep without blemish was a case of this in the OT (Lv 5:15). In modern Christianity you have the doctrine of substitutionary atonement, which seems to be symbolically related.
 
andyandy said:
The OT biblical approach to justice is very much of the "eye for an eye" variety of Deuteronomy and elswhere....but we shouldn't find it that surprising - tit-for-tat retaliation provides a simplistic framework within which a rudimentary justice system can operate - and fulfils both the "punishment" and "deterant" needs of society.....
Click to expand...

Interestingly, it's fair to call "eye for an eye" a progressive rule in the context in which it was introduced, for it was designed to curb the practice of unlimited vengeance. (The NT introduced a further progressive step in this development, of course.)
 
saizai said:
It seems to me that the biblical historical sort of justice is heavily revenge-punishment based, and doesn't seem to care that much about reform. This is especially the case for "sin -> hell/heaven"; there is obviously no chance at reform in that case, nor for 3a-c, nor 3d-e except for the punishers (god?).
Click to expand...

Two thoughts about this:

1) I've always felt that a major reason for belief in the supernatural is the human desire for justice. People are not very good at identifying criminals and punishing them, but in principle, an all-knowing, all-just God can fill in the cracks where humans failed. I recall something about camels, needles, and rich men, for example.

2) Having said that, I think that each religion fans out to fill all ideas like this. There are elements of Christianity which do look like reform: born-agains, anabaptism, deathbed conversions... these people are 'saved' from ultimate punishment. There is also the Catholic concept of Penitence, and Purgatory, which is a delay before reaching that ultimate reward, during which penitance is probably the norm. (Thus, the relationship to the word "penitentiary" - they are situations where reform can come from reflection, providing an opportunity to have a better life afterward.)

Christianity is a mixed bag where forgiveness is concerned, because so many Gospels are about pacifism, whereas Revelations is about cut-and-dried, relentless revenge. Many biblical scholars recognize Revelations as an anomaly, but it's impossible to reject outright. So, depending on your point of view, there's plenty in the bible to buttress either of these conflicting points of view regarding Christianity and justice.
 
phildonnia - Thanks for the correction; sacrifice is indeed another traditional method, although very rarely practiced in civil/criminal justice.

SwissSketpic - My list was intended to be generic and not exclusively theological. Revenge can only be on the part of the people harmed, I think. Could one consistently say that sinning "harms" Yahweh? Seems a bit odd.


My intention was to primarily generate discussion about real world effects of this, e.g. in the modern US (or other countries') justice system, both criminal and civil; in everyday interpersonal relationships (SOs, friendships, whatever); etc.
 
saizai said:
SwissSketpic - My list was intended to be generic and not exclusively theological. Revenge can only be on the part of the people harmed, I think. Could one consistently say that sinning "harms" Yahweh? Seems a bit odd.
Click to expand...

I agree that (at least from my atheist point of view) it's odd to say that sinning "harms" God, but nevertheless "revenging God" was how the justice system rationalised punishing criminals for a long time, so it's probably safe to assume that the people doing this rationalisation thought that sin indeed harms or at least offends God.

I'm not familiar with the whole theology behind it, but from a logical point of view this idea of revenge seems sound, as long as you assume that God exists and He punishes the communtiy (through famine, war etc.) for the sins of its individuals. Of course now it isn't only God who's revenged, but also the community as a whole.

My intention was to primarily generate discussion about real world effects of this, e.g. in the modern US (or other countries') justice system, both criminal and civil; in everyday interpersonal relationships (SOs, friendships, whatever); etc.
Click to expand...

I'm probably being dense here, but I have trouble making that leap. I can't recognise any remains of the model of thinking that you mentioned in your OP in our current justice system. Maybe an example would help.
 
It doesn't make sense to me to seek revenge for being *offended*. That's something different - definitely exists but different. The community can seek revenge for the implied harm upon it of course; if the sinner has brought god's punishment upon the entire community then they have obviously caused a major harm to everyone, and reaction to that could justifiably be called "revenge".


Some examples re modern life:
* the "War on Drugs" - purely punishment-centered, very sin-like. Does not seriously address the source issues, just behavior.
* the model of relationships where you punish your partner for behaving "improperly" or in a way that harms / offends you, or in which you seek revenge; vs where you figure out why they did whatever they did and why it hurt you, and trying to fix either or both "why"s (empathic)

You could probably come up with other, better examples. The connection is of a fundamental outlook of (punishment + external controls + obediance + revenge) vs (reform + internal controls + internalization + empathy). I think this crops up quite a lot really. Social research supports the latter over the former as being the effective one.

Do you want more specific examples?
 
Isn't the " forgiveness, no matter what you have done ", thing, in
the NT , just sort of a recruiting tool ?

Doesn't it remain popular today for the same reasons ?


I'ts not as if the Baptists ( or insert any " -ist " here ) are all that willing to forgive you,
if you don't become a Baptist ...
 
diogenes: Off topic, but... you don't need to do your own linebreaks. It just makes your text ugly. Let the system wrap your text for you.
 
diogenes: *shrug* If it's Art, ok.

IME most people who do just didn't realize that there's autolinebreaking. Either 'cause they're really really new to computers or really really oldskool. :p
 
I have always believe it's good for people to take to heart the attitude of do unto others as you would have done to you. In reality this doesn't always happen with others, but at least trying to take a stand to say or do the right thing, rather than the wrong things could give one a sense of peace.

Jesus taught a lot about forgiving others even when they may seem or be wrong. Turn the other cheek and all that. I do find it better to be kind to others even if they are not kind to me. Praying for my enemies and so on.

I like what Matt 6:14-15 tells us... "For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
"But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.
 
Last edited:
kurious_kathy said:
....................
I like what Matt 6:14-15 tells us... "For if you forgive others for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.
"But if you do not forgive others, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.
Click to expand...

I thought you had to believe to be forgiven ..

Is it O.K. to just forgive, and don't bother about believing ?

Will God forgive you, your transgressions, but send you to hell anyway ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom