Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Okay, again I was thinking. And I don't know that I agree that the father would allow the child to be tortured and become a martyr. History proves through a psychological test and from past experience that the father would not allow his child to be tortured, and he would give up the information.
So here is yet another dilemma in this ethical question. If you torture the child, you are guilty of sin. But then possibly thousands of people, including children and babies lives are saved. It does not say the child is killed, only tortured (which is bad enough).
Which is a worse sin? Torturing a child, or knowingly allowing thousands of people to die...even though you are not at fault...but yet you could've stopped it and saved those lives...so are you at fault too? You may not have placed the bombs, but you had an opportunity to save these people's lives.
Which is a worse sin? Torturing a child, or knowingly allowing thousands of people to die...even though you are not at fault...but yet you could've stopped it and saved those lives...so are you at fault too?
When you torture a child you could prevent him from wanting to have children himself and by that one act stop his bloodline, which could have include 1000's of people also.
Quote:
And I don't know that I agree that the father would allow the child to be tortured and become a martyr. History proves through a psychological test and from past experience that the father would not allow his child to be tortured, and he would give up the information.
Then he's simply not a true fanatic like Abraham who never ever questioned God ( well maybe he did question God, but obeyed Him anyway).
Moderator cut: orphaned
Originally Posted by I LOVE NORTH CAROLINA
Quote:
Obey God and leave the consequences up to Him.
The problem is that all fanatics already believe that they are doing just that. Can't you people understand this? They are fanatics and you probably are not.
You can't reason with fanatics; they are part of a closed mindset, they don't care about what the outside world thinks or believes.
Last edited by Alpha8207; 11-29-2007 at 05:05 AM..
I don't agree with that for the fact that it is contingent upon the terrorist being truthful about the way he feels about his son through the psychological test. The mayor is not responsible and is not at fault either way because if one is a Christian,one knows that God makes the final judgement and will condemn the unrighteous.
I have an ethical challenge for you. From a Christian worldview, meaning with all your knowledge from the Bible...if you were put in this situation what would you do? There is no right or wrong answer. Or is there?
The mayor of a large city learns that a terrorist organization has planted bombs in a large number of family dwellings. The mayor does not know which dwellings are affected. The size of the city and a projected short period of time before the explosions preclude the possibility of large-scale evacuations.
The leader is well known of a terrorist organization. Even under torture he refuses to divulge the bombs’ locations. Through psychiatric evaluation, the leader’s personality history yields the prediction that he will provide the relevant information only if his young child is tortured before his very eyes. From a Christian worldview, what would you do?
Well the mayor has learned that there are bombs but this can not be proven without physically seeing them. So thus it is only an assumption that these bombs actually do exist in the first place.
Lets assume they do exist for the sake of argument.
Psychiatric evaluation is at best an educated guess and while potentially revealing and even on occasion, reliable information can be gained over time, it is time you do not have.
No. I would not sacrifice any child for any reason.
Myself I would consider sacrificing before anyone, should it have to be that way. My life would not be even close to bareable knowing I sacrificed someone, even if it was for the sake of saving many others .
I do not consider myself God, and I do not feel any human has that right to toss in someone else no matter how right they feel about it.
We have freewill, God has given us that. How we use our freewill is up to us; meaning God did not make this "situation" you are describing, man did. Would I feel it was on "me" if I said ok we will torture the child in exchange for the info........yes. And I feel I would have to answer to that .
After considering this challenge, I do not really see the dilemma. The basis of Christianity is faith in God. Wouldn't the logical choice be to trust in Him to intervene in this situation? To me, the torture of an innocent child, regardless of the benefit or the "greater good" or even the end justifying the means, is in opposition to the bible.
One scripture that comes to mind is in Matthew 5:43-45 "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."
But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you; That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust."
The thing is that God loves the good people and the bad people.
So if God would consider me evil for torturing a child but saving 1000s of people, he'd still love me. And I've saved 1000's of people of a horrible death.
If I only tortured people just because I love to see people suffer, that would be a completely different thing now, wouldn't it?
Originally Posted by MooksterL1The thing is that God loves the good people and the bad people.
So if God would consider me evil for torturing a child but saving 1000s of people, he'd still love me. And I've saved 1000's of people of a horrible death.
If I only tortured people just because I love to see people suffer, that would be a completely different thing now, wouldn't it?
That is a good point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When you torture a child you could prevent him from wanting to have children himself and by that one act stop his bloodline, which could have include 1000's of people also.
Can't you people understand this? They are fanatics and you probably are not.
. 
And I've saved 1000's of people of a horrible death. 
