Transplanar

Imagine the following scenerios:

A) A sinful man kills a pious man, thus sending the pious man to hell.

B) A virtuous yet pagan man preaches to a bunch of pious people turning them away from faith in Jesus, thus sending himself and those he spoke to hell.

Now, if it is true that Hell exists (or even the existence of a non-heaven. After all, why settle for the mediocre?), is it not morally permissable, and perhaps even a moral imperative of a Christian to kill the pagan man converting people? After all, in the first case the victim goes to heaven, but in the second case everyone involved goes to hell. If the pagan man is allowed to live he will convert more and more people away from Christianity, damning their souls to hell for eternity. Seeing as the soul is more important than the body, would it not be acceptable to kill someone to silence their blasphemous teachings?

Toto

I gather that you meant to write "heaven" in case A.

This was in fact the reasoning in the middle ages, during the time of the Inquisition - that it was better to kill people than to allow souls be diverted from heaven. The Inquisition is a major embarrassment to Christianity, to the extent that the Pope has apologized for it. Everyone today believes that their should be no compulsion in matters of belief.

No one thinks it is ok to kill pious men who would be going to heaven.
like thry say, everyone wants to go to heaven but nobody wants to die.

I think this question belongs in MF'P

spamandham

...and the rounding up of heretics in the 3rd century, and the witch trials, and the crusades, and 9/11, ...

Superstition kills.

ELECTROGOD

Just recently Christians in threads here and on the YouTube Blasphemy Challenge have been outright admitting that the murder their god being is attributed with is perfectly fine and justified...apparently because "god" is god.
The clear violation and contradiction with the all-important moral system this supposed god "created", represents and demands we follow seems to escape them though.

long winded fool

"Thou shalt not kill."

If you kill a blasphemer who is corrupting pious people, YOU go to hell. Therefore killing him is not acceptable, no matter how many people he corrupts. Sacrificing your life for the life or soul of another is virtuous. Sacrificing your soul for any reason is damnable. Dying to stop sin is good, sinning to stop sin is bad. Two wrongs never make a right in this case, no matter how many souls are ultimately spared by your sacrifice.

llamaluvr

The logic that would lead the person to kill the pagan preacher isn't, erm... completely logical. While a convincing trickster may influence people in one direction or another, friendship or emnity towards God is not considered something you fall into accidentally. You're not culpable for falling away if you're simply confused about things- you're not turning away in that case, you're just getting honestly mixed up. If you follow that smooth operator with full knowledge and deliberate consent, you are turning away from God. So, bottom line, even with false preachers around, culpability still ultimately rests with the individual.

CanoeMan

How's about this then: Babies are innocent and without sin, according to most christians. (Some may add stipulations like being baptised and so on, but it can be generally agreed that babies are less sinful than adults.)

However, if you let the babies grow up, at least some of them will become sinners and go to hell. So it seems to me that the moral thing to do, from that christian perspective, is to kill them while they're innocent. It should be moral to do this, even if it sends you to hell. After all by going to hell yourself you save many others from sharing that same fate.

long winded fool

Number one, babies are not sinless. According to Christian dogma, all humans with the exception of Jesus (and possibly Mary, before she gave birth to him) "have sinned." They tend to get around the baby problem by assuming that God has a way of communicating with babies and forgiving their sins.

Number two, if all sin is by definition failure to do to God's will, and therefore immoral, then preventing greater sin with a lesser sin is still immoral.

TracerBullet

Sorry. According to Christian doctrine it is morally acceptable if not outright required to murder the following people:

People who don’t listen to the preaching’s of you and/or other Christians - Deuteronomy 17:12

Any and all Wiccans - Exodus 22:17

Gay men - Leviticus 20:13 (lesbians are apparently A-OKAY)

Fortune tellers, astrologers any friend of Dion Warwick - Leviticus 20:27

Defiant children - Exodus 21:15

Ill behaved children - Proverbs 20:20

Anyone have sex without first being married in a Christian approved ceremony - Leviticus 21:9

Buddhists, Hindus, Muslims - Exodus 22:19

Any of the above mentioned neighbors and friends - Deuteronomy 13:13-19

Murdering the children of non-Christians is always correct…one would guess you should murder a non-Christian’s children first…so they may witness the suffering of their children and thus get a preview of the torments of hell - Isaiah 14:21

The curious - 1Samuel 6:19-20

Any prophet whose prophecy doesn’t’ hit the mark (which would include just about any guest of the 700 Club) - Zechariah 13:3

Any bride who is not a virgin (Martha Stewart notes that disemboweling the bride adds a special something to any wedding) - Deuteronomy 22:20-21

Prisoners of war…hey its cheaper than feeding them - Jeremiah 51:20-26

Murder your brothers and sisters?….Don’t worry, its OK - Exodus 32:26-29

Its always OK to murder rape victims - Deuteronomy 22:23-24

Nurses, firemen, emergency room personal, store clerks, police officers and anyone else twisted enough to work on a Sunday all deserve to be murdered…hmmm priests should be in this category too - Exodus 31:12-15

And don’t’ forget it is all right to murder good samaritans - 2 Samuel 6:3-7

bajan

Thanks TracerBullet but I think it is not only emergency personnel that would be included by Exodus 31:12-17 but all Christians that keep the Sunday sabbath!