Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Theli · 02-04-2003, 01:30 PM

This might not be the right forum to post this...

Let's just assume the following, heaven and hell is eternal. Heaven is the outcome of living an overall moral life, confessing your sins and accepting Christ. And we reach one of these places after we die. The exact conditions are not important to this example.
We can also assume that based on the loooong time you will spend in either heaven/hell and the extreme nature of those places, any pleasure and pain we might encounter in this life pales in comparison. And life becomes no more than a trial. A test of character, if you like.
Now, idealy you should not die after cheating on your wife, swearing intil your throat is dry and neglecting god for all it's worth, because then you will end up in hell. The best time to die would be after you confessed your sins, and "cleaned your spirit from sins".
You cannot commit suicide after confessing all your sins and donating all your money, whoever made up the rules noticed that little loophole.

But, what if a second person (knowing that you just had devoted your life to christ) were to kill you? In the prime of your christian time, so to speak. You would go straight to heaven, right? Assuming ofcourse that you didn't ask him to kill you. Because as long as you are alive you risk falling back into a sinfull lifestyle. And you might not have time to confess until it's too late.

Now, would it (based on christian moralcode) be right to kill a person to save him from risking hell?

If you have any solutions (or anything else), I'll be standing outside your favorite church with an axe.

dangin · 02-04-2003, 01:56 PM

Well see, I think you have just formed the next suicide/homicide cult. You could arrange it with a large group of people that they get a gun and decide on some prearranged order, and then the first person begs for redemption and is immediately shot in the head by the next person, and then that person beg redemption and is shot, and so on, and so on.

Of course this is only after they have turned over their estates to me, the founder of the cult, and I go on to find a new flock to sheer and slaughter.

Sounds like fun. Do I have to wait for Haley's comet to come around again so I can tell people the heavenly spaceship is hiding in it's tail. . .

McFish · 02-04-2003, 03:05 PM

I thought this was the rationale used by the catholic church to kill the south american indians after converting them to christ?

I thought this was a generally accepted view among the christians?

Theli · 02-05-2003, 03:56 AM

Yes, I mean. Most religious dogma tends to refer to this life as a test or a trial. So, why should it be so wrong to kill another person?
If you make the sacrifice of going to hell in the process, then aren't you just following in the footsteps of Christ? Even more so, as Christ never actually ended up in hell.
I would think a christian would think twice before trying to prove his/her own innocence and morality to me. Perhaps I'm aiming for being a saint (by aiming at other saints).

I don't know.

The Other Michael · 02-05-2003, 02:07 PM

GRD seems more appropriate for this topic.

Michael
MF&P Moderator, First Class

Phanes · 02-05-2003, 03:17 PM

Wasn't something like this in Hamlet? IIRC, Hamlet wanted to kill his uncle, but the first time he caught him unaware, his uncle was praying. Since Hamlet wanted him to suffer in hell, he decided to let him go for the time being.

long winded fool · 02-05-2003, 03:21 PM

I think the easy christian response is, "Judge not lest ye be judged."

From a christian perspective, who am I to damn my soul by killing someone to save his? According to the Bible, God loves all sinners as much as saints and would rather everyone go to heaven. Sacrificing your own soul is worse than preventing someone from sacrificing theirs. If you can't stop someone from sinning, we are told to "shake the dust from your sandals" and move on. It is far better for us both to go to heaven, this is why murdering is a sin regardless of the state of the victim's soul. Yes the victim will go to heaven if he or she is in the "prime of their christianity" so to speak. But since killing is a sin, it is obviously not right to kill them. This seems simple enough to me. It would be right and is commanded for you to try your best to see that said person doesn't fall into sin, but commiting a sin in order to prevent them from commiting a sin is fundamentally wrong. Jesus didn't admonish his apostles to go and make disciples of the world using any means necessary. This is contradictory to his teaching. They were every bit as important to him as the sinners and he wasn't willing to sacrifice them for someone else. Therefore, to do God's will is to attempt to lead a sinless life, regardless of the outcome. Those who think that it is pious to sin for the sake of another's soul "have eyes but do not see." Do you think Jesus might call someone who does this a Pharisee?

braces_for_impact · 02-05-2003, 03:35 PM

Long winded fool said:

I think the easy christian response is, "Judge not lest ye be judged."

From a christian perspective, who am I to damn my soul by killing someone to save his? According to the Bible, God loves all sinners as much as saints and would rather everyone go to heaven. Sacrificing your own soul is worse than preventing someone from sacrificing theirs. If you can't stop someone from sinning, we are told to "shake the dust from your sandals" and move on. It is far better for us both to go to heaven, this is why murdering is a sin regardless of the state of the victim's soul. Yes the victim will go to heaven if he or she is in the "prime of their christianity" so to speak. But since killing is a sin, it is obviously not right to kill them. This seems simple enough to me. It would be right and is commanded for you to try your best to see that said person doesn't fall into sin, but commiting a sin in order to prevent them from commiting a sin is fundamentally wrong. Jesus didn't admonish his apostles to go and make disciples of the world using any means necessary. This is contradictory to his teaching. They were every bit as important to him as the sinners and he wasn't willing to sacrifice them for someone else. Therefore, to do God's will is to attempt to lead a sinless life, regardless of the outcome. Those who think that it is pious to sin for the sake of another's soul "have eyes but do not see." Do you think Jesus might call someone who does this a Pharisee?

I think this viewpoint opens up an entirely new can of worms. Should one not kill to prevent one's own life or that of a loved one to be taken? What if you have no other choice? I'm sure there are a myriad of other reasons people could see a problem with this sort of mentality.

christ-on-a-stick · 02-05-2003, 04:40 PM

IIRC this was the gist of Andrea Yates' motive in drowning her 5 (?) children. She was convinced that she was failing as a parent and, rather than risk their mortal souls by failing to ensure that they would be "saved" after the age of accountability, she decided that she should sacrifice her own soul in order to save theirs.

The crazy thing is that after this, the Xians could (rightfully) see how crazy this is - yet one of the oft-told stories in the OT is about how Abraham's willingness to kill his own child was such an awesome show of his faithfulness to God.

Now, Andrea Yates thought that Satan was speaking to her (through the TV, etc.) and Xians have no problem explaining this (again, properly) as mental illness.

How, then, can they assume that Abraham wasn't insane as well??? Why is it reasonable to believe that God (supernatural entity) spoke to a human and ordered them to kill their child but crazy to believe that Satan (supernatural entity) spoke to a human and ordered them to kill their child?

Methinks their ought be some cognitive dissonance going on there...

McFish · 02-05-2003, 07:15 PM

I find religion to be scary because I can think of no reason why it is "unchristian" to kill new converts to send them to heaven, esp. if somebody is hearing the "voice of god" telling them to do it.

I think it was in Colorado...A week or two ago I read about a guy who swerved off the road to hit (kill?) a pedestrian. His explanation? "God was in the passenger seat and he told me to kill that woman."

If the only objective morality your religion allows is tied to the whims of an imaginary (to me at least, sorry) fellah, any action you can think of can become a positive and "moral" option.

Poor Amekalites...

02-04-2003, 01:30 PM	#1
Theli Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,567	Heaven and hell crux. This might not be the right forum to post this... Let's just assume the following, heaven and hell is eternal. Heaven is the outcome of living an overall moral life, confessing your sins and accepting Christ. And we reach one of these places after we die. The exact conditions are not important to this example. We can also assume that based on the loooong time you will spend in either heaven/hell and the extreme nature of those places, any pleasure and pain we might encounter in this life pales in comparison. And life becomes no more than a trial. A test of character, if you like. Now, idealy you should not die after cheating on your wife, swearing intil your throat is dry and neglecting god for all it's worth, because then you will end up in hell. The best time to die would be after you confessed your sins, and "cleaned your spirit from sins". You cannot commit suicide after confessing all your sins and donating all your money, whoever made up the rules noticed that little loophole. But, what if a second person (knowing that you just had devoted your life to christ) were to kill you? In the prime of your christian time, so to speak. You would go straight to heaven, right? Assuming ofcourse that you didn't ask him to kill you. Because as long as you are alive you risk falling back into a sinfull lifestyle. And you might not have time to confess until it's too late. Now, would it (based on christian moralcode) be right to kill a person to save him from risking hell? If you have any solutions (or anything else), I'll be standing outside your favorite church with an axe.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-04-2003, 01:56 PM	#2
dangin Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: The Middle, Kansas Posts: 2,637	Well see, I think you have just formed the next suicide/homicide cult. You could arrange it with a large group of people that they get a gun and decide on some prearranged order, and then the first person begs for redemption and is immediately shot in the head by the next person, and then that person beg redemption and is shot, and so on, and so on. Of course this is only after they have turned over their estates to me, the founder of the cult, and I go on to find a new flock to sheer and slaughter. Sounds like fun. Do I have to wait for Haley's comet to come around again so I can tell people the heavenly spaceship is hiding in it's tail. . .

02-04-2003, 03:05 PM	#3
McFish Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Nowhere close to Chicago Posts: 694	I thought this was the rationale used by the catholic church to kill the south american indians after converting them to christ? I thought this was a generally accepted view among the christians?

02-05-2003, 03:56 AM	#4
Theli Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,567	Yes, I mean. Most religious dogma tends to refer to this life as a test or a trial. So, why should it be so wrong to kill another person? If you make the sacrifice of going to hell in the process, then aren't you just following in the footsteps of Christ? Even more so, as Christ never actually ended up in hell. I would think a christian would think twice before trying to prove his/her own innocence and morality to me. Perhaps I'm aiming for being a saint (by aiming at other saints). I don't know.

02-05-2003, 02:07 PM	#5
The Other Michael Honorary Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In the fog of San Francisco Posts: 12,631	GRD seems more appropriate for this topic. Michael MF&P Moderator, First Class

02-05-2003, 03:17 PM	#6
Phanes Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 127	Wasn't something like this in Hamlet? IIRC, Hamlet wanted to kill his uncle, but the first time he caught him unaware, his uncle was praying. Since Hamlet wanted him to suffer in hell, he decided to let him go for the time being.

02-05-2003, 03:21 PM	#7
long winded fool Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: USA Posts: 2,113	I think the easy christian response is, "Judge not lest ye be judged." From a christian perspective, who am I to damn my soul by killing someone to save his? According to the Bible, God loves all sinners as much as saints and would rather everyone go to heaven. Sacrificing your own soul is worse than preventing someone from sacrificing theirs. If you can't stop someone from sinning, we are told to "shake the dust from your sandals" and move on. It is far better for us both to go to heaven, this is why murdering is a sin regardless of the state of the victim's soul. Yes the victim will go to heaven if he or she is in the "prime of their christianity" so to speak. But since killing is a sin, it is obviously not right to kill them. This seems simple enough to me. It would be right and is commanded for you to try your best to see that said person doesn't fall into sin, but commiting a sin in order to prevent them from commiting a sin is fundamentally wrong. Jesus didn't admonish his apostles to go and make disciples of the world using any means necessary. This is contradictory to his teaching. They were every bit as important to him as the sinners and he wasn't willing to sacrifice them for someone else. Therefore, to do God's will is to attempt to lead a sinless life, regardless of the outcome. Those who think that it is pious to sin for the sake of another's soul "have eyes but do not see." Do you think Jesus might call someone who does this a Pharisee?

02-05-2003, 03:35 PM	#8
braces_for_impact Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In a nondescript, black helicopter. Posts: 6,637	Long winded fool said: I think the easy christian response is, "Judge not lest ye be judged." From a christian perspective, who am I to damn my soul by killing someone to save his? According to the Bible, God loves all sinners as much as saints and would rather everyone go to heaven. Sacrificing your own soul is worse than preventing someone from sacrificing theirs. If you can't stop someone from sinning, we are told to "shake the dust from your sandals" and move on. It is far better for us both to go to heaven, this is why murdering is a sin regardless of the state of the victim's soul. Yes the victim will go to heaven if he or she is in the "prime of their christianity" so to speak. But since killing is a sin, it is obviously not right to kill them. This seems simple enough to me. It would be right and is commanded for you to try your best to see that said person doesn't fall into sin, but commiting a sin in order to prevent them from commiting a sin is fundamentally wrong. Jesus didn't admonish his apostles to go and make disciples of the world using any means necessary. This is contradictory to his teaching. They were every bit as important to him as the sinners and he wasn't willing to sacrifice them for someone else. Therefore, to do God's will is to attempt to lead a sinless life, regardless of the outcome. Those who think that it is pious to sin for the sake of another's soul "have eyes but do not see." Do you think Jesus might call someone who does this a Pharisee? I think this viewpoint opens up an entirely new can of worms. Should one not kill to prevent one's own life or that of a loved one to be taken? What if you have no other choice? I'm sure there are a myriad of other reasons people could see a problem with this sort of mentality.

02-05-2003, 04:40 PM	#9
christ-on-a-stick Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Durango, Colorado Posts: 7,116	IIRC this was the gist of Andrea Yates' motive in drowning her 5 (?) children. She was convinced that she was failing as a parent and, rather than risk their mortal souls by failing to ensure that they would be "saved" after the age of accountability, she decided that she should sacrifice her own soul in order to save theirs. The crazy thing is that after this, the Xians could (rightfully) see how crazy this is - yet one of the oft-told stories in the OT is about how Abraham's willingness to kill his own child was such an awesome show of his faithfulness to God. Now, Andrea Yates thought that Satan was speaking to her (through the TV, etc.) and Xians have no problem explaining this (again, properly) as mental illness. How, then, can they assume that Abraham wasn't insane as well??? Why is it reasonable to believe that God (supernatural entity) spoke to a human and ordered them to kill their child but crazy to believe that Satan (supernatural entity) spoke to a human and ordered them to kill their child? Methinks their ought be some cognitive dissonance going on there...

02-05-2003, 07:15 PM	#10
McFish Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Nowhere close to Chicago Posts: 694	I find religion to be scary because I can think of no reason why it is "unchristian" to kill new converts to send them to heaven, esp. if somebody is hearing the "voice of god" telling them to do it. I think it was in Colorado...A week or two ago I read about a guy who swerved off the road to hit (kill?) a pedestrian. His explanation? "God was in the passenger seat and he told me to kill that woman." If the only objective morality your religion allows is tied to the whims of an imaginary (to me at least, sorry) fellah, any action you can think of can become a positive and "moral" option. Poor Amekalites...

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.