Ethical question posed to Christians

[kal-el]

I seen something like this on another forum a while back, I don't remember. Anyway, I asked 3 people at my job this question today, and I was shocked at some of the answers I got. Ok, Christians, suppose you open your bathroom door, and lo and behold, God himself is sitting by the bathtub, cuddling a 3 month old infant. Now he tells you that this infant will grow up and be responsible for millions of deaths. He tells you to drown the baby in the bathtub. What would you do?

[Determined1]

I'm not sure that I believe in a God that would do that for one, and being a survivor of incest and physical abuse as a child, i think there are blessings even in the worst of "evils", so killing one supposedly evil child may not even "save" others.
"scar tissue is by far the strongest skin over time."

[Ncik666]

I took this question as a purely ethics based question. Just take it as if you found out yourself through pure logic, or some technology, that this child would grow up and kill these thousands. I have yet to see an actual response to this, just "Oh, Pshhh, god wouldn't do that"

[AClockWorkOrange]

God would never ask of anyone to commit murder and break one of the commandments.

i beg to differ.


"And Israel joined himself unto Baalpeor: and the anger of the LORD was kindled against Israel. And the LORD said unto Moses, 'Take all the heads of the people and hang them up before the LORD against the sun, that the fierce anger of the LORD may be turned away from Israel.'" (Numbers 25:3-4)

"And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death; because he hath spoken to turn you away from the LORD your God..." (Deuteronomy 13: 5)

"Thou shalt surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword, destroying it utterly, and all that is therein, and the cattle thereof, with the edge of the sword." (Deuteronomy 13:15)

to name a few

[samuelbb7]

I agree with Catharsis.

By the way the examples given. Are government actions in a war and in the case of a shall we call them a spy sent from the devil. That is not the same as the scenario.

If to take god out of the scenario. Say you find out from the future that a child of today was going to grow up and kill thousands. Would you kill the child? That makes the question solid for all not just believers.

[Determined1]

Yes, if you take God out of it i've no doubt, i would sacrifice the one for the many.

[The Persnickety Platypus]

I would drown God for creating such a child to begin with.

[reality101]

I seen something like this on another forum a while back, I don't remember. Anyway, I asked 3 people at my job this question today, and I was shocked at some of the answers I got. Ok, Christians, suppose you open your bathroom door, and lo and behold, God himself is sitting by the bathtub, cuddling a 3 month old infant. Now he tells you that this infant will grow up and be responsible for millions of deaths. He tells you to drown the baby in the bathtub. What would you do?

well for one God does not show himself to people until the time of death if you go to heaven hence the beatific vision

but in that scenario u don't drown the baby for a few reasons
1) it is not your rite to take a humans life
2) if you read the catechism of the catholic church it points out the fundamentals of morality on of which is "intent"
although the intent would be good it is still an evil act
and no good intent can turn an evil act into a good one but it can reduce the severity of that act
example if someone is trying to kill you u can use wutever means neccessary to stop that attack but you would still need to confess and repent for that sin but it would be more venial than mortal

[MagusYanam]

well for one God does not show himself to people until the time of death if you go to heaven hence the beatific vision

but in that scenario u don't drown the baby for a few reasons
1) it is not your rite to take a humans life
2) if you read the catechism of the catholic church it points out the fundamentals of morality on of which is "intent"
although the intent would be good it is still an evil act
and no good intent can turn an evil act into a good one but it can reduce the severity of that act
example if someone is trying to kill you u can use wutever means neccessary to stop that attack but you would still need to confess and repent for that sin but it would be more venial than mortal

Welcome to the forum, reality101! I hope you find your debates here thought-provoking and useful.

Firstly, though, I had a question about 'beatific visions'. What does this entail?

With 1.), I personally agree, but I'm going to play devil's-advocate here and ask - if indeed that human life is a grave threat to society (supposing for a moment those millions of deaths were not conjecture but reality), would the society still have no right to take that life? If not, why not?

With 2.), how does one distinguish between 'venial' and 'mortal' sin? It looks like the Catholic Church is trying to have it both ways - the ends can partially justify the means, as long as there is good intention behind it.

[reality101]

well for one God does not show himself to people until the time of death if you go to heaven hence the beatific vision

but in that scenario u don't drown the baby for a few reasons
1) it is not your rite to take a humans life
2) if you read the catechism of the catholic church it points out the fundamentals of morality on of which is "intent"
although the intent would be good it is still an evil act
and no good intent can turn an evil act into a good one but it can reduce the severity of that act
example if someone is trying to kill you u can use wutever means neccessary to stop that attack but you would still need to confess and repent for that sin but it would be more venial than mortal

Welcome to the forum, reality101! I hope you find your debates here thought-provoking and useful.

Firstly, though, I had a question about 'beatific visions'. What does this entail?

With 1.), I personally agree, but I'm going to play devil's-advocate here and ask - if indeed that human life is a grave threat to society (supposing for a moment those millions of deaths were not conjecture but reality), would the society still have no right to take that life? If not, why not?

With 2.), how does one distinguish between 'venial' and 'mortal' sin? It looks like the Catholic Church is trying to have it both ways - the ends can partially justify the means, as long as there is good intention behind it.

venial sin is a less severe sin i.e. slaping someone in anger
were as mortal sin is more severe i.e. murder

the ends can never justify the means
this is alot like the question of is it ok to inprison one innocent man if it means 100 guilty men also get inprisoned he first answer most would think is obviously yes
but in reality the answer is no for 2 reasons
wut if the one innocent man was you
and also (a more political look at it)

"those who would sacrifice freedom for safety deserve neither and loose both"
-Ben Franklin
you cant take away an innocent mans freedom for your own feeling of safety

in answer to your question about number 1
you sill wouldnt drown that baby because
it is not guilty of anything yet
it would be like me killing you because you told me you are going to murder 3 people
a true believer in their religion would gladly die for the will of their God
(example: islamics and terrorist)

but while i think more about this i think of the story of abrahams son were God tested him to sacifice his only son and he was about to when God stopped him and was pleased with his willingness to comply
but God tells us "thou shalt not kill" so for god to tell us to kill someone would be a contridiction therfore i think the most realistic answer would actally be that that is not a realistic situation

[Determined1]

I seen something like this on another forum a while back, I don't remember. Anyway, I asked 3 people at my job this question today, and I was shocked at some of the answers I got. Ok, Christians, suppose you open your bathroom door, and lo and behold, God himself is sitting by the bathtub, cuddling a 3 month old infant. Now he tells you that this infant will grow up and be responsible for millions of deaths. He tells you to drown the baby in the bathtub. What would you do?

well for one God does not show himself to people until the time of death if you go to heaven hence the beatific vision

but in that scenario u don't drown the baby for a few reasons
1) it is not your rite to take a humans life
2) if you read the catechism of the catholic church it points out the fundamentals of morality on of which is "intent"
although the intent would be good it is still an evil act
and no good intent can turn an evil act into a good one but it can reduce the severity of that act
example if someone is trying to kill you u can use wutever means neccessary to stop that attack but you would still need to confess and repent for that sin but it would be more venial than mortal

Well, I supposed that wraps it all up in a nice little package for Catholics, but to me that's pure hypocrocy on the part of this religion, have you happened to see a settlement yesterday for all of the evil this religion has caused.
Nope that one just doesn't work for me.

I do believe however that there is a very good reason why we aren't allowed to view the future, maybe we just weren't meant to shoulder such a burden.
Blessings!