Kalessin
Quote:
|
For example, an African-American slave that attempted to escape, or resisted enslavement with violence, may indeed have committed a crime against the legislature and office, and even against the will of the majority, over and above any harm to those particular individuals attempting to enslave him.
|
Forgive me. I never intended to imply that the will of the majority is an infallible judge of what is
right. Someone once said that pure democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep voting on dinner. Your example of slavery is an excellent case in point. But it does show rather well that there is a "higher standard", a better yardstick, that the will of the majority is hardly the last word in justice.
Enter Eru. The principles set down by an all-knowing Being of pure benevolence, One Who seeks only the greatest good for the universe as a whole and each individual in particular, can not be judged on the same level as laws made by limited and fallible men. There is no higher standard.
In the case yo mention of a resisting or escaping slave, he would be prosecuted by the laws of the day and found guilty of disobeying an
unjust law. Laws change. The Creator does not. Slavery was wrong from the get-go by the Highest Standard, but men failed to see it. The 20-20 hindsight provided by history vindicates the actions of those who fought slavery.
As an aside. it is interesting that you mention the Biblical quotes ("rendering unto Caesar" etc.), because there is a particularly applicable principle in the book of Acts. When the disciples of Christ were given an unjust command by the lawful authorities of the day, they responded, "We must obey God rather than men."
True justice, as you say, will judge the intentions (the "heart") of the guilty. To apply this to my prior posts, let me amend the scenario thusly. If a man punches a policeman, he is already guilty of the crime of assault against a person -- this much is given. If the pugilistic man is unaware that the victim
is a policeman, and not just a policeman but one on-duty and acting in the lawful course of his duties, then true justice will not convict the man of the more serious crime of assaulting a police officer.
On the other hand, if the man
does know that the man being punched is a policeman, and is punching him with the purpose of resisting or hindering him from his just and lawful purposes, then true justice will convict him of figuratively punching the hundreds or thousands of people whose collective will gives the policeman his authority. I think the best word is rebellion.
To tie this all together, there can be no question that Melkor and Sauron
knew just exactly Who they were rebelling against. This makes their crime heinous indeed.
Lastly, I do not claim to have the last word on the free-will/predestination debate -- I don't even know if I properly grasp the question in all its complexity. All I have is a framework that explains enough for me not to worry about the question. And enough faith to hope that the Creator does not deceive when he makes everyone think that they are independent wills, choosing their actions.
Thanks, Kalessin, for the interesting debate.