Final answer:
God as a judge, in religious terms, is often seen as omniscient and omnipotent, dispensing fair judgement and punishment only when deserved. Modern judges, contrastingly, are confined to the law and evidence, with their authority limited to the court's structure and legal framework. The core difference lies in the scope of their knowledge and the extent of their authoritative power.
Step-by-step explanation:
Differences Between God as Judge and Modern Judges
When comparing the characteristics of God as a judge in early Judaism and modern judges in the judiciary, there are distinct differences. In religious texts, God is often depicted as omniscient and omnipotent, having infinite knowledge and power to judge actions fairly across all social standings, no one is exempt from this divine judgment. Such a deity is also seen as just, not punishing out of capriciousness or cruelty as seen with some ancient religions' deities; punishment is bestowed only when deserved.
Modern judges, on the other hand, are bound by the law and judicial process. They cannot claim omniscience and must rely on evidence presented in court. Moreover, modern judicial systems are structured to protect individual rights and uphold democratic principles within the confines of a legal framework. Unlike a divine judge, human judges can only exercise power within the realms of the court system, their legal authority does not extend to absolute judgment of moral character or non-legal aspects of an individual's life.
In conclusion, God as a judge symbolizes an ultimate authority with complete knowledge and power, while modern judges operate within a structured legal system with limited authority and a reliance on law and order.