Having been 7 months since i first posted on the first page of this topic I have just read those posts and acknowledged a huge transfromation in myself for the better. How naieve I was! I feel inclined to apologize for my lack of mental creativity to think in a more moral perspective but I won't. I still held a JW bias. In fact I will thank Cofty and all others who contributed for and against his initial claims for helping me and others to grow! :) This is why I joined.
I especially am gratefull for the part where I tried to defend the "paradise is the ultimate goal" theory to downplay suffering and up-play rewards and Cofty developed Theodicy #15 after posing the question, " To be clear the question that has to be addressed is "does the promise of eternal life make suffering morally right?"
I really thought I had it figured out. Even when #15 was made I read it over and over and still disagreed with it, but couldn't come up with anything solid enough to post confidently in rebuttle. I remember typing up long winded posts only to delete them after proof-reading only to find out it was totally useless or morally unacceptable.
Re-reading much of this thread now after 7 months of spiritual self introspection and research I find this whole thread (especially the fformative pages leading to 74) essential to those who are truly open minded enough and in search of the "truth."
15. Suffering will be unimportant compared to eternal rewards
Response - This is ethically repugnant. It is an extreme example of "the end justifies the means" defense, so beloved of tyrants.
Like other theodices it is dehumanising by reducing humans to pawns in god's game.
Imagine that scientists developed a pill that would eradicate all unwelcome memories and create a feeling of bliss.
How would you judge a scientist who imposed the most horrific suffering on millions of people, as unwilling subjects of his experiment, but who gave all of them one of the magic pills when it was over?