Chapter 14 Chapter 13 Is there justice and axiom in this life or in the next life
There is a very old and philosophical and theological question that troubles people of faith, and that is the difficult problem.Simply put, since there is a God, why do bad things happen to good people and good things happen to bad people?Questions such as these, of course, will only be puzzling to you if you believe that God intervenes in human affairs, and that He is omniscient, omnipotent, and just.As the Reverend Billy Graham said of President Kennedy's tragic assassination: "God has a plan for everyone." Anyone who believes in this destiny must struggle with the many grievances of God's actions : For people who don't believe in God, or who believe in Aristotle's claim that the Creator is a "bystander," there's nothing incomprehensible about this phenomenon.
The world is inherently random, so there is no reason for disease, natural disasters, wars, and many other misfortunes to affect only the bad and not the good.If only good things happen to good people, it would be like attributing moral order to physical principles.In fact, because bad people are usually more exploitative and selfish, it stands to reason that, in a world without God, good things happen more often to bad people and bad things more often happen to good people.As long as human beings want to establish a just and axiomatic order in a random world, they must try their best to make up for the injustice caused by nature, so as to reward good people and punish bad people.However, in the end, it seems that the grievances caused by nature can never be compensated by man-made justice and axioms, so on the whole, there seems to be no justice and axioms in this world.Some point to the fact that so many bad things happen to so many good people as irrefutable proof that God does not exist, or that God is merely a bystander.They would quote a line from Einstein: "God doesn't play the universe with dice." Then they deduced that if this statement was true, then unless God did not exist, a just God would not randomly make dice. People are wronged.Because the world we live in is obviously determined by the roll of dice, the result of randomness.Once, when I was teaching a class with evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould, I wrote on the blackboard, "Gould or God?" You can't be both, because in Gould In the world in Gerard's theory, evolution is the result of randomness.Gould replied that things that seem random in the eyes of humans may be orderly in the eyes of God. In any case, God can act according to reason and act randomly.
Sometimes God's justice and axioms need to be explained reasonably. In order to answer Job's plaintive cry: "Why me?" It has been a pain in the ass for thousands of years to find an answer.From ancient times to the present, believers have devoted a lot of time, energy and creativity to solving this puzzle. Perhaps because of this, the Bible has such thought-provoking chapters as "Job" and "Ecclesiastes".Both of these passages directly address the problem of theodicy, yet neither provides an answer that satisfies everyone.
Job's friends struggled to explain why so much misfortune had happened to such a good man as Job.Their answer, however, is like another version of the naturalistic fallacy. If bad things happen to you, you deserve it, because God can never allow misfortune to happen to a perfectly virtuous person. "Although God does not agree with such an explanation, he gave another answer that is even more unsatisfactory because I am God." How can a mortal wish to understand God's will?What audacity!This kind of reductive "non-answer" not only reduces the theodicy question to an irrelevant level, but also makes people don't want to touch this question at all.
"Ecclesiastes" simply avoids answering, and offers a suggestion that is a bit too hedonistic, that is, eat and drink as usual, and remain skeptical, anyway, people will return to dust after all.Finally, there is added an unsatisfactory epilogue, that of fearing God and keeping his commandments. (Perhaps this epilogue was added by later generations when compiling the Bible, so that the book of Ecclesiastes would not be deviant.
Abrahamic beliefs eventually developed a more complete and elegant solution to the theodicy problem: there is an afterlife visible to mortals, where sin is punished and good deeds are rewarded.According to this theory, God purposely made this afterlife invisible to humans in order to test our willingness to believe by faith.So even though what we see around us is unreasonable things, yet we are taught not to trust our eyes.In order to inspire his people to have faith in invisible justice, God also quoted Groucho Marx's line in the movie "Duck Soup" (Duck Soup): "Which one will you believe in? Me, or your lying eyes?"
The Bible has gone through three stages to establish a world where justice and axioms are obscured.In the earliest books of the Bible there is no mention of an afterlife.This is really surprising, because the Jews lived in Egypt for a long time and then received the Torah at Mount Sinai.The entire Egyptian civilization was based on belief in an afterlife.Even the last chapter of "Genesis" describes how Joseph was buried in the Egyptian way, how to embalm, and how to put the mummified remains in the coffin.
Although the Jews were so familiar with the Egyptian belief in an afterlife, they accepted a Torah that seemed to avoid, or even ignore, the life after death.Of course, it is also possible that the Jews deliberately avoided talking about it because the Egyptians valued the afterlife.
But this does not mean that the Bible is against the use of threats and inducements to strengthen the world's obedience to God's will.The God in the Bible can both threaten and lure; but in the Ten Commandments, "all" God's punishments and rewards are carried out in this life.
The first stage is when the consequences of an action are an immediate and visible threat in this world.Those that fit this category include God's first warning to Adam: "You shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for in the day you eat of it you will surely die!" The sword will cut you down, and your wife will be a widow, and your son will be fatherless", "I will send fear on you, even consumption and fever", "bring seven times the plague", "let the wilderness Beasts have come into your villages and eaten your children", "spawned infectious diseases", "turned cities into ruins" and "beat you with sores... itching... madness... your lives are in danger... The Lord will carry you back to Egypt in a ship"
On the other hand, visible rewards include "(I will) prolong your life", "Your life will be improved and your lifespan will be improved", "I will send down rain...and let the wild beasts be eradicated by you ", "Let you be stronger than the nations", "Let your enemies be defeated" and "Bless you in your land" and so on.Moreover, the time and place of these punishments or rewards are all clear!Such as "the land God gave you", the "place" is this world; and the "time" is now, so fast that your wife will be widowed and your son will be fatherless. rewards and punishments.
Some later commentators believe that the afterlife and the invisible justice and axioms, although not mentioned in the Ten Commandments, have always existed.But if God wants us to know that we will receive retribution from above in the next life, why would He keep it secret?Aren't these rewards and punishments after death the means God wants to use to influence us?He should know that in this world, we look around and there are grievances everywhere.That's right, the Bible puts this point in the book of Ecclesiastes where there is justice and justice, but there is also evil... I have seen righteous people die because of integrity, and despicable people live long because of despicableness. "And God himself is often a wavering force, just like he treated Job. (Satan provoked God to test Job, just like the serpent tempted Eve to eat the forbidden fruit. Some Bible commentators firmly believe that the serpent is Satan. However, just as Eve wanted to Responsible for his actions, God is also responsible for killing Job's innocent children.
Assuming that belief in an afterlife existed in Job's time, God could have explained to Job that his pain was only temporary and would be compensated in the afterlife.However, the fact is not the case. There is a chapter in Midash that criticizes Job for denying that "the dead will be resurrected." Throughout the Bible, there are often examples of good people being punished in this world, while wicked people are rewarded. If you believe in an afterlife, then this aspect Doubts can be answered, but in reality they are not.
Everyone knows that there has been no justice or justice in this world since ancient times.This is why the role of Job is so shocking and impressive.Anyone with a little observation ability will inevitably notice the relationship between the wicked and the death, plague, beasts, and rotten sores threatened by heaven, and the relationship between the saint and the long life and prosperity, good and evil, and retribution promised by heaven. In no way are they equal or commensurate. The book of Ecclesiastes tells us not to "take such things as surprises" or expect the opposite.However, human beings absolutely do not want God to act as he pleases as described in the book of Ecclesiastes, regardless of good or bad, and let all people face the same fate. Everyone returns to the same place. "Therefore, no matter when and where the retribution will be fulfilled, there must be rewards and punishments, right? If there is no distinction between right and wrong in life, then what is the use of God?
However, God's first attempt to answer this question failed.He could no longer threaten Adam with a clear statement of immediate punishment and then fail to carry it out.Everyone knows that Adam lived a very long life.So, God began to issue threats of indefinite time to individual sinners, such as your wife will become a widow (but not necessarily today), you will be infected with boils and plague (someday in your life) but , even this late punishment sometimes does not come.The sinful people not only live a hundred years, but also live longer than their wives and concubines, without half a rotten sore.Therefore, God had to take his system of rewards and punishments to another level.
When God tried a second time to establish an axiom of eternal justice, although he postponed the consequences of someone's current actions to his descendants, it still happened in this world.In the Ten Commandments, God threatens that if a person commits a crime, his three or four generations of descendants will be punished. At the same time, he also promised that for those who "love me and keep my commandments, my grace will last a thousand generations." "In the first few books of the Bible, God repeatedly extends His punishments and rewards to sinners and saints to their descendants, thus making them invisible to a particular generation. He learns one thing , that is, if he threatens immediate and visible punishment, as he did with Adam, he is likely to be creditably bankrupt if he fails to carry it out. If the consequences of his actions are extended beyond a certain generation, he is thirteenth prime Whether there is justice or axiom187 in this life or in the next life can retain a little deterrent effect for one's own threats.
The Bible and Midrash go to great lengths to explain that God's threats and promises will actually be fulfilled in future generations. In the Book of Genesis, there are many examples of reaping melons and reaping melons, especially in the story of Jacob and his children, we can see that the plot of unsatisfactory retribution appears again and again. The Midrash develops this theme with several didactic stories in which descendants are rewarded or rewarded for the vices or virtues of their ancestors.Cain's crime of killing his brothers was retribution seven generations later, when Yin Sun shot an arrow by mistake and died.
Only in the era of reliable history (or in the era of only oral stories) is it possible to establish the possibility of intergenerational retribution.In the era of complete historical data, we can easily see that retribution may not necessarily happen to the descendants of sinful people, and good things may not particularly favor the descendants of saints.indeed so.After experiencing events such as the Crusades, the Great Inquisition, and the Holocaust by the Nazis, it is clear that God has not fulfilled his promise, nor has he rewarded the descendants of the saints.In fact, the reason is very obvious, because many saints have no offspring at all, how to reward them?The entire family, village, and region were all killed without leaving any children or grandchildren, and the villain who committed the murder became the founder of the city and became a respected leader.
Many Nazi murderers lived affluent, healthy, fulfilling lives, were neither blamed nor imprisoned by guilt, and held high places in the hearts of their children and grandchildren.Victims of genocide and other horrific atrocities yearn for a time and place where justice will be served, comforting the good and punishing the bad.This deep desire for retribution for evildoers helps us understand why, sixty years after the Holocaust, the children and grandchildren of the victims still insist on filing lawsuits against those who profited from the labor of the Jewish concentration camps. The company recovers the blood money.I've also helped a few possible murderers be acquitted, and then they seem to be living a good life, but I understand the anger in the heart of the sufferer.Every time I see people like John Demjanjuk, who worked for the Nazis, have a happy family, live a long and healthy life, and live a prosperous life, I will inevitably burn with anger and resentment.
In this world, justice and axioms cannot be fully upheld, and no one can give a perfect answer to the theodicy problem, even if God delays the execution of retribution and rewards to another generation.
Furthermore, the punishment or rewards to be borne by descendants also raises the moral dilemma of what rights and obligations an individual has towards the family or ethnic group.It is wrong to let innocent descendants be punished for the mistakes of the predecessors.In fact, this issue had already surfaced when God punished Adam and Eve. God not only exiled the two of them, but also imposed pain on their descendants, all males and females.If Cain's killing of Abel was also seen as part of their parents' punishment, then how innocent Abel was that his life was paid for a crime he did not commit.
The Great Flood, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and the extermination of the entire family of Shechem are other examples of collective punishment.Subsequent legal texts dealt with such difficulties in terms that conflicted with the most primitive statutes.For example, the Ten Commandments threatened that punishment would "prolong the disaster for four generations." The book of Deuteronomy, which was written later, decreed: "The father shall not be put to death because the son is guilty, nor shall the son be required to pay for his life because the father is guilty; everyone must Pay for your sins."
It can be said that interpreters have racked their brains to resolve this apparent conflict in the scriptures.However, in addition to conflicting laws, the practice is inconsistent everywhere in the Bible.God ordered the destruction of Amalek from generation to generation because of the sins of a certain generation.He threatens to punish the offspring of the wicked and reward the offspring of the righteous.Sometimes, collective punishment is imposed down several generations in the direction of direct descendants, and sometimes it is imposed horizontally (only one generation is punished, but the whole family is punished, the whole family is affected, and even the same country is affected). However, God also agrees with Abraham. In my opinion, the innocent should not be wiped out along with the sinners.
To this day, there is still considerable disagreement about the responsibility of parents for the behavior of their children.After the massacre at Columbine High School, there has been an uproar in society demanding that parents must take more civil and criminal responsibility for their children's actions.After the defeat of Nazi Germany, some people thought that collective punishment should be imposed on all German citizens.In the end, however, the verdict was to punish only those who were proven guilty; because the Allies refused to adopt the concept of the so-called Sippenhaft (punishing relatives), which was widely used by the Nazis, to pay back.
In the end the Jews accepted the principle that one should not be punished or rewarded for having committed no crime or good deed;This principle has taken a long time to develop, yet it is easy to build on theory but hard to put into practice.Whenever we punish someone for a crime, whether by execution, imprisonment, fine, or otherwise, we also punish his innocent family, friends, colleagues, subordinates, and all people inflicted harm.By the same token, when we reward someone for his good deeds, the benefits spread to those around him who did not deserve the credit.
Any judicial system that is limited to the parties cannot completely avoid the effects of collective punishment or rewards. However, there is a great difference between the system that clearly stipulates collective punishment in the provisions and the system that collective effects are only an unavoidable side effect. big difference. "Genesis" reflects the evolution from the collective responsibility system (the so-called collective, including family, family, group, city, country, race and belief, etc.) to the party responsibility system.Historically, this path has not been in a straight line, as the sentimental force of the idea of collective responsibility remains strong.
So God's second attempt to assure his people that there is still justice and justice in the world after all, only fails.There are two reasons, one is empirical and the other is moral.In terms of evidence, once the letter of history is developed, we can clearly see that future generations have not been punished for the evils planted by the Yu people; and in terms of morality, we always feel that a judicial system that makes people reward and punish for others is inappropriate.Judaism, Christianity, and Islam must therefore accept the solution proposed by other religions, that is, in the afterlife, good people will be rewarded and bad people will be punished.Such justice and axioms can indeed be done, but no one can see this world with their own eyes, and no one can come back from there or bring information.However, this clean and neat method solves this difficult problem that no other method can solve.
The promise and threat of this world recorded in the first few books of the Bible and the punishment and threat of the afterlife passed down by commentators are sharply contrasted. In the second century AD philosopher Eli Chalabi [Rabbi Elisha, son of Abuyah] is wonderfully presented in the horror story.The philosopher had seen God fail in his clearest promises, and he became a disbelief.According to records, on a Sabbath day, when Elisha was studying in Gennesar Valley (Gennesar), he saw a wicked man climbed to the top of a palm tree and took away the mother bird and chicks from the nest.This man broke two commandments: the commandment to keep the Sabbath, and the commandment not to catch the hen bird.Yet he was unharmed.After the Sabbath, Elisha saw a little boy climb up a tree to gather some bird eggs. His father asked him to let the mother bird go, and the boy followed his father's instructions, so he obeyed the two express promises. The precept of living a hundred years.Who knew that the boy was bitten by a snake right after he climbed down the tree, and died.So Elisha sternly reprimanded God for breaking his promise: "There is no justice and justice in the world, and God has no eyes."
Rabbi Akiva, the greatest philosopher of the age, also explained this in response to Elisha's accusation against God: Although the scriptures seem to be clearly written, the promise of long life, But not in this world, but in "another world to come"; a world of "all good" and "eternal and endless." The promises and threats of the world cannot be observed or verified.
Elisha's story is thought-provoking for the following reasons.In the real world, where the boy was killed, the good man suffered misfortune and the bad man profited, no reasonable man would believe that the promised reward or the threatened punishment of heaven would come to pass in this world. will come true.Elisha, a rational skeptic who believed what he saw with his own eyes, believed that the first mechanism of punishment in the Bible—immediate retribution in this world—was false if tried.Although "Ecclesiastes" recognizes the unfairness of life and the vanity of death, it still accepts God.King David blinded himself, claiming that he had never seen "a good man cast aside, nor his children starve and cold." He was blind to the wrongs of the world.However, ordinary people who cannot live in the deep palace see the real world full of crimes.As a result, Judaism had to accept the views prevailing in other religions and even rival religions at the time.
The philosophers searched through the scriptures, especially the writings of the prophets, and claimed that although the Torah did not expressly say, there is an afterlife after death, and all rewards and punishments in this life will be settled there.Rabbi Eleazor was convinced: "What is not judged on earth, God will—judgment." Maimonides developed this theme further, and managed to reconcile the argument of life after death with that clearly listed in the Bible. The scriptures of reward and punishment in this life are combined:
Therefore, the good rewards promised and the evil consequences threatened in the book of the law are to be interpreted in the following way: If you serve God with joy and keep his ways, he will bless you and protect you. You are not affected by the curse; then you have the leisure to cultivate the wisdom in the book of the law, soak in it, and obtain eternal life after death; in that perfect world, you will be happy and happy, enjoying every day forever and ever. one day.So you will have two worlds: not only a happy life in this world, but also eternal life in the next life.
However, if you have not gained wisdom and done good deeds in this life, you are not entitled to compensation in the next life.As the predecessors said: "There is no work, no tools, no knowledge, no wisdom in the grave." ("Ecclesiastes" chapter 9, verse 10) However, if you abandon God, commit gluttony, alcoholism, lust And other sins, God will put those curses on you, and take away your blessings, until you end your life in confusion and terror.You will not have the freedom of mind and sound body necessary to obey the commandments, and you will be eternally damned in life after death.So you will lose both worlds, because in this world you are suffering from disease, war and famine, and you are not trying to develop wisdom or practice the teachings, which is the way to obtain eternal life after death.
Therefore, although justice and axioms cannot stand any test in the world, they can continue in a world that no one can prove.So without this transcendental attitude of faith, all traditional religions would not be possible.
Judaism is based on the covenant between God and his people. If there is no afterlife for him to put the promised results in the eyes of mankind, I am afraid that Judaism will not be so easy to pass on.In the mortal world, God's promised rewards, such as longevity and the defeat of enemies, have repeatedly broken promises.As the tenth-century philosopher Saadia Gaon put it hopefully (if that tone is not longing) "In this world we see the godless prosper and the pious suffer. Therefore die There must be an afterlife where all will be justly and equitably compensated.” A contemporary evangelical made the same argument recently when speaking on television about the killing of innocent children.Reverend Robert Schuller insists that it is impossible for immortality to realize eternal justice and axioms.These are common religious responses to unexplained tragedies.
There is another version of this theme, put in modern political terms by the famous conservative rabbi: "In the tragic reality of the world, where poverty, disease and war crush the human body and mind, the afterlife is protest against this."
Isaac Loeb Peretz, a Jewish-Polish writer in the 19th century, had a tearful story about a Jewish-German man, showing that in this miserable world of poverty and disease, there is still a need for hope for an afterlife.There was a man named Bansha who had a rough life, poverty, disease, abuse by his parents, but never complained to God or anyone else.However, in this world, no one noticed that he was dead, and even the board marking the place where he was buried was blown away by the wind.But in heaven, he received a grand welcome ceremony.Even the angels who specialize in visiting traitors and investigating evils couldn't find any flaws in him.God, the ultimate judge, declares his will for bansha:
In that world, no one understands you...in that world, the world of lies, your silence is not rewarded, but heaven is a world of truth, and in heaven you will be rewarded...you not only have heaven A small part, because it's all for you!I have everything I want!Everything belongs to you!
Bancia smiled for the first time, and then said, "If that's the case, what I want, my lord, is to have hot rolls with fresh cream every morning for breakfast."
This Jewish German story is developed from the promise in the New Testament: "The weak will inherit the world, but the rich will not enter heaven." The balance of good and evil will be balanced, and the starting point of competition will be leveled , and justice and justice will eventually be done.Those who are virtuous but despised in this world will flourish in the next life.This cruel world without axioms is to be overthrown by the transcendental attitude provided by the Abrahamic faith.
Not all philosophers, however, intend to accept, without evidence, the a priori belief that the wrongs of this world can be compensated for by a perfect connection with the afterlife.Rabbi Judah Low, the great Prague scholar of the sixteenth century, took a more rational view: "The foundation of religion cannot be founded on what cannot be empirically observed." One of the reasons why Dharma books "avoid mentioning the afterlife".Other Bible interpreters believe that the reason why the generation of Jews who left Egypt were not willing to accept the concept of an afterlife is precisely because they were bullied too deeply by the Egyptians.Once the Jewish people came to accept the afterlife, they found this idea in the oral tradition.
A passage in Midash, written after the rabbis had accepted the idea of an afterlife, describes Jacob and Esau arguing over the subject of an afterlife when Esau betrayed his birthright:
Esau: "Is there an afterlife after death? Or should I say, will people come back from the afterlife after death? If the answer is yes, then why didn't Adam come back? Have you ever heard of Noah who rebuilt the world again? Did it appear in the world? Also, did Abraham, God's friend and God's favorite person, ever come back from the dead?"
Jacob: "If you think there is no afterlife, and that the dead do not come back, then what do you want the birthright? Sell it to me while you still have the chance. For once the law is given, you will It can’t be sold anymore. In fact, the next life does exist, and good people can get good rewards there. Let me explain it to you now, so that you won’t say I lied to you in the future.”
The concept of the afterlife solves all the problems of theodicy beautifully, so that God no longer needs to let the descendants of human beings bear the consequences of threats and temptations.In a world where there is no afterlife, it may be necessary to punish or reward posterity, for sometimes the threat of taking the sinner's own life will not prevent the crime from being committed, especially if the person is in his prime and more It is difficult to receive a deterrent effect, so the punishment must be more severe.If God could threaten eternal damnation, or promise eternal deliverance, there would be no need to threaten sinners with perpetuation, or to promise good men divine favor over posterity.
Speaking of which, the threats and promises that will only be realized in future generations are actually equivalent to the threats and promises that will be realized in the afterlife.Both of these are invisible to the person concerned; on the other hand, both of them are also intended to give an answer to those who see sinners being rewarded and saints suffering in the world.In a world where rewards and punishments are imposed on future generations, it is possible to believe in the existence of justice (at least temporarily) despite the obvious factual evidence to the contrary. His descendants will be punished for him, and if the next generation or two is not punished, then there will always be some future generation who will pay the price.In the same way, the statement that rewards and punishments will be imposed on the sinner himself, but only in the next life, is still convincing, but the actual situation always makes it clear to us that in this world, sinners often Rewards are given and saints are often punished.Perhaps he has escaped judgment in this life, wait and see when he reaches the gate of heaven.
Therefore, whether it is the imposition of uncertain rewards and punishments for future generations on earth, or the promise of heaven and the threat of hell in the afterlife after death, these two words are very important to contemporary people who have watched many wrongs in the world. You can't see it with your own eyes, and because you can't see it, you need faith to overcome the doubts you want to verify.
If, as a certain legal principle advocates, "justice and axioms count only when they are seen with their own eyes", then both God and mankind have failed in the endless pursuit of justice and axioms.Because justice and axioms are so rare in this world.If justice can be done in the next life or in future generations, then we can continue to believe that that day will come.In other words, justice cannot be required to be seen, otherwise justice would be difficult to do because it is so rare.Clearly assure the believer that you can be sure of one thing: the wicked will be condemned by God, and the good will be safe. "But anyone who can see, hear, and think can't be so sure, because everyone sees the opposite happening again and again every day.
It may be that this assurance is untrue (as in the conclusion of Ecclesiastes: "All is vanity"; or as in the Ten Commandments, which refer here to posterity; or as in Maimonides We promise generally, it's a promise of an afterlife. There's no other possibility. And we'll never know which one the answer is. Because it's a question of belief, not verification.
It is no accident, then, that as Abrahamic beliefs shifted from relying entirely on earthly rewards and punishments to believing in an afterlife after death, there was a parallel evolution in which rewards and punishments for good and evil gradually moved away from doing good. or offspring of the iniquitous himself.Finally, the reason why Judaism can accept such an important principle that the parties will personally bear the consequences of their actions is all because Judaism gradually accepts the concept that God will personally settle all good and evil deeds in the next life.I don't know if the world of the afterlife exists (no one knows). However, whether this world is created by God or mortals, I must praise its creator, because the idea of the afterlife solves a great mystery: Why should one A God who is just and effective will allow so many unjust things to happen in the world?
But, no matter how much people believe in an afterlife after death, no society is willing to tolerate crimes in this world solely on this a priori belief.Every society begins with the actual punishment of crime, rather than the purgatory that awaits religious belief in the afterlife.No one seemed willing to gamble with Pascal on whether God would punish all sins.However, to enforce worldly punishment, there must be a set of worldly rules.It is these rules and how the story of Genesis influences them in the next chapter.
Notes:
Notes: