God is love. God is just. God is merciful.

[genkaus]

That's the point of the cross. The judge paid the just penalty himself, which allows him to be merciful as well.

You'll likely complain that it's not just to allow one person to pay the penalty for another. That's fine as your opinion. God sees it otherwise, and as lawmaker and judge it's his opinion that counts.

So, your god's justice is subject to his opinion? That makes it subjective. And since most people talk about objective laws when considering what is just and what isn't, your god's "subjective justice" is meaningless. He could just as easily be of the opinion that everyone should pay the same penalty regardless of actions and call that justice.

[John V]

So, your god's justice is subject to his opinion?

Yes. There's not some objective law outside of and superior to God to which he must submit.

That makes it subjective. And since most people talk about objective laws when considering what is just and what isn't, your god's "subjective justice" is meaningless.

All laws are subjective.

He could just as easily be of the opinion that everyone should pay the same penalty regardless of actions and call that justice.

Yep.

[genkaus]

All laws are subjective.

There are plenty of objective laws available which do provide fair and just judgments. But apparently, your god's laws are neither objective nor fair.

[Aoi Magi]

That's the point of the cross. The judge paid the just penalty himself, which allows him to be merciful as well.

You'll likely complain that it's not just to allow one person to pay the penalty for another. That's fine as your opinion. God sees it otherwise, and as lawmaker and judge it's his opinion that counts.

1) He orchestrated the crime, he sanctioned the punishment, he determined the penalty, he paid that penalty, to himself.
- Sounds more like a psycho dictator to me.

2) I'd actually complain he didn't pay the penalty. If you pay the officer for your speeding ticket, and then snatch the money back from him, that's not paying the penalty. Similarly, JC didn't stay dead, he played possum for three days then flew away.

3) How do you know God is the lord and judge? And how do you know there's no one above him? As far as I know, YHWH is or rather was a lower member of an ancient pantheon of other gods.

[Chas]

That's the point of the cross. The judge paid the just penalty himself, which allows him to be merciful as well.

You'll likely complain that it's not just to allow one person to pay the penalty for another. That's fine as your opinion. God sees it otherwise, and as lawmaker and judge it's his opinion that counts.

1) He orchestrated the crime, he sanctioned the punishment, he determined the penalty, he paid that penalty, to himself.
- Sounds more like a psycho dictator to me.

2) I'd actually complain he didn't pay the penalty. If you pay the officer for your speeding ticket, and then snatch the money back from him, that's not paying the penalty. Similarly, JC didn't stay dead, he played possum for three days then flew away.

3) How do you know God is the lord and judge? And how do you know there's no one above him? As far as I know, YHWH is or rather was a lower member of an ancient pantheon of other gods.

Actually, he only played dead for less than two days.

Friday mid-day to Sunday morning. Not even 48 hours.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

Maybe the question should be to whom God is loving, merciful and just?

God loved Barabbas but he still hates Esau.

[John V]

There are plenty of objective laws available which do provide fair and just judgments. But apparently, your god's laws are neither objective nor fair.

Ask those convicted if the laws and punishments are fair and just. Many of them will say they're not. Yet you think they are. That's because law is ultimately subjective, not objective. Even if you use some objective framework, the choice of that framework over others was ultimately subjective.

[genkaus]

Ask those convicted if the laws and punishments are fair and just. Many of them will say they're not. Yet you think they are. That's because law is ultimately subjective, not objective. Even if you use some objective framework, the choice of that framework over others was ultimately subjective.

Why do you think fairness and justice depends on what the convicts or I say? It doesn't. Law is ultimately objective - though some subjectivity creeps in here and there. The choice of that framework isn't dependent upon someone's wishes or whims, which is why it isn't subjective.

[John V]

Why do you think fairness and justice depends on what the convicts or I say?

Because if it were objective, everyone would agree on it.

[genkaus]

Because if it were objective, everyone would agree on it.

Nonsense. There are plenty of objective concepts people disagree about.