Christians! : What would you do if....

What would you do if?

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

Would you kill an innocent child if God demanded it of you?

No - but I would still be devoted to him
6
13%
Yes
14
30%
Yes - if it meant safe passage into heaven for me
0
No votes
No - and turn your back on God
27
57%
 
Total votes: 47

User avatar
VermilionUK
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:48 pm
Location: West-Midlands, United Kingdom

Christians! : What would you do if....

Post #1

Post by VermilionUK »

Hypothetically speaking, and assuming God exists:
If you were demanded- by God - to kill an innocent child, would you do it?
When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
- Sherlock Holmes -

User avatar
VermilionUK
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:48 pm
Location: West-Midlands, United Kingdom

Post #31

Post by VermilionUK »

Pastor4Jesus wrote:
VermilionUK wrote:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:The child would be history if a true creator of the universe demanded his death, however his death would simply be another level of existence. I would kill myself if somehow I knew it was God asking me to do it, why not?

P4JC
Why not? Because your life is infinately valuable. In killing yourself, you would be throwing away your physical life, with the assumption of an instant heavely reward.

What if God didn't suggest that he would give you a reward/or the child a reward? Would you still do it? The criteria in the OP suggests nothing of a heavenly reward.
No you said it was God the creator of the universe that asked me to whack the kid. The everlasting life isn't a reward, its the order of things. If God said the child was going to go to a kind of hell and he wanted to kill the child for say the pleasure of killing I would have to decline because it would not be the God that I worship.

P4JC

Pastor4Jesus wrote:The everlasting life isn't a reward, its the order of things
So you would be killing the child with the expectation of a heavenly afterlife, because "its the order of things"? Would you not say such a mind-set was perhaps selfish? If not, why not?

If the afterlife in heaven is not a "reward", why else would you kill the child, if not to improve your chances of entry to heaven?
Pastor4Jesus wrote:If God said the child was going to go to a kind of hell and he wanted to kill the child for say the pleasure of killing I would have to decline because it would not be the God that I worship.
How do you know the character of the God you worship? From the fact that God permits people to die from natural diseases (which, considering God made everything in the natural world - would be his creation), one could conclude that God does enjoy death.

All my OP stated was "Hypothetically speaking, and assuming God exists:
If you were demanded- by God - to kill an innocent child, would you do it?"
.

God states nothing, all he/He demands is the death of the child - no reason, explanation or consequence for your actions is given.
When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
- Sherlock Holmes -

Pastor4Jesus
Sage
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Far East TN Mountains

Post #32

Post by Pastor4Jesus »

joeyknuccione wrote:Worship or not, any god that asks me to kill a child will meet my wrath.
What a comical visualization that statement provoked! I am sure God is shaking in his cosmic Nikes.

~Anyway~

Many children met their death in war when they were attempting to kill other soldiers. So there are times that I would kill a child even without God telling me to, say if he has a AK 47 in his little hands blasting away at me....sad and regrettable, but true.

Additionally abortion supporters help kill millions of would be infants, to me that is even more appalling than above (killing in self defense).

P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)

User avatar
VermilionUK
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:48 pm
Location: West-Midlands, United Kingdom

Post #33

Post by VermilionUK »

Pastor4Jesus wrote: Many children met their death in war when they were attempting to kill other soldiers. So there are times that I would kill a child even without God telling me to, say if he has a AK 47 in his little hands blasting away at me....sad and regrettable, but true.
What does that have to do with the question?
Pastor4Jesus wrote: Additionally abortion supporters help kill millions of would be infants, to me that is even more appalling than above (killing in self defense).

P4JC
I'll have to disagree there. In many cases, it's a case of the parents choosing an abortion due to them not being fit for parenthood.
"Then why did they have sex?" I hear you ask. Human nature and desire is the answer.

Other cases range from the would-be child having a painful life/poor quality of life due to disability or disease which would strongly prevent the child living a happy life - In those cases, I'd say it shows mercy, as it spares the would-be child a life of pain.

And then there's the rape victims, under-age mothers etc etc.

If we didn't have abortion, then there'd be a lot of young children with an incredibly poor quality of life.


Anyway, that's getting off topic.
When you have eliminated all which is impossible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth
- Sherlock Holmes -

Pastor4Jesus
Sage
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Far East TN Mountains

Post #34

Post by Pastor4Jesus »

What does it have to do with this question? >>> "Worship or not, any god that asks me to kill a child will meet my wrath." I was opining that killing a child is excusable if he is trying to kill you.
If we didn't have abortion, then there'd be a lot of young children with an incredibly poor quality of life.
Well it could be worse. They could of been aborted. Or ask them with the disabilities etc, how many of them want to die now? It would be more humane and ethical, because at least death would be their decision.

P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)

User avatar
JoeyKnothead
Banned
Banned
Posts: 20879
Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
Location: Here
Has thanked: 4093 times
Been thanked: 2572 times

Post #35

Post by JoeyKnothead »

From Post 31:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:
joeyknuccione wrote: Worship or not, any god that asks me to kill a child will meet my wrath.
What a comical visualization that statement provoked! I am sure God is shaking in his cosmic Nikes.
Point being I'd rather fight an infinitely powerful entity I couldn't possibly defeat than to harm an innocent child. I do note that I didn't specifically mention the innocent part in the original.

I try not to add any more conditions than the OP applies, as I see such to be a bit of a dodge or even strawman.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin

Pastor4Jesus
Sage
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Far East TN Mountains

Post #36

Post by Pastor4Jesus »

joeyknuccione wrote:From Post 31:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:
joeyknuccione wrote: Worship or not, any god that asks me to kill a child will meet my wrath.
What a comical visualization that statement provoked! I am sure God is shaking in his cosmic Nikes.
Point being I'd rather fight an infinitely powerful entity I couldn't possibly defeat than to harm an innocent child. I do note that I didn't specifically mention the innocent part in the original.

I try not to add any more conditions than the OP applies, as I see such to be a bit of a dodge or even strawman.
Well on a purely theoretical thing yes most of us would defend a child. Of course if God was evil I would be worshiping the other guy.

P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)

User avatar
McCulloch
Site Supporter
Posts: 24063
Joined: Mon May 02, 2005 9:10 pm
Location: Toronto, ON, CA
Been thanked: 3 times

Post #37

Post by McCulloch »

Pastor4Jesus wrote:Of course if God was evil I would be worshiping the other guy.
How could you tell the difference?
Examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.
First Epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians
The truth will make you free.
Gospel of John

Pastor4Jesus
Sage
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Far East TN Mountains

Post #38

Post by Pastor4Jesus »

McCulloch wrote:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:Of course if God was evil I would be worshiping the other guy.
How could you tell the difference?
Being a theoretical question if the child was innocent and that entails all the nuances of innocence that are theoretically possible, God would be evil to harm it according to the common definition of good and evil and God.

P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)

User avatar
VermilionUK
Scholar
Posts: 330
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 2:48 pm
Location: West-Midlands, United Kingdom

Post #39

Post by VermilionUK »

Pastor4Jesus wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:Of course if God was evil I would be worshiping the other guy.
How could you tell the difference?
Being a theoretical question if the child was innocent and that entails all the nuances of innocence that are theoretically possible, God would be evil to harm it according to the common definition of good and evil and God.

P4JC
What about Abraham and Isaac? Sure, God didn't have the child killed, but I'd say it's pretty evil to allow a father to prepare to sacrifice his son, only to be stopped at the last minute. Or is that the action of a loving God?

It's not too far off the scenario in the OP

Pastor4Jesus
Sage
Posts: 548
Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 4:41 am
Location: Far East TN Mountains

Post #40

Post by Pastor4Jesus »

VermilionUK wrote:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:
McCulloch wrote:
Pastor4Jesus wrote:Of course if God was evil I would be worshiping the other guy.
How could you tell the difference?
Being a theoretical question if the child was innocent and that entails all the nuances of innocence that are theoretically possible, God would be evil to harm it according to the common definition of good and evil and God.

P4JC
What about Abraham and Isaac? Sure, God didn't have the child killed, but I'd say it's pretty evil to allow a father to prepare to sacrifice his son, only to be stopped at the last minute. Or is that the action of a loving God?

It's not too far off the scenario in the OP
Well personally I think its a huge difference. God wanted Abraham to prove his faith. He did and the rest is history. I agree its a horrific situation and one that fairly terrified me as a child. There are many stories and verses of scripture that I question as being parable or truth or maybe has a translational error, and its why I switched to theology in school. I was fascinated with religion. However I wish now that I had simply switched to archeology and geology. Seminary was too structured etc.

P4JC
When Selfish Gene author Richard Dawkins challenged physicist John Barrow on his formulation of the constants of nature at last summer Templeton-Cambridge Journalism Fellowship lectures, Barrow laughed and said, “You have a problem with these ideas, Richard, because you aren''t really a scientist. You''re a biologist ! (Woo Hoo you go Barrow!)

Post Reply