Achilles wrote:
Sometimes you need to fight and yes kill for something much bigger than yourself. Yes killing is still evil and we can wish forever for a better way. But lets face it. People are stupid, stubborn and violent. Sometimes being violent is the best way to resolve a bigger problem.
Cogitoergosum wrote:
true sometimes violence is warranted and u might fight for a cause, but if a cause makes u kill innocent people on purpose then that cause is not worth fighting for. There is a difference between intentionally targeting innocent people and collateral damage in a war where we don't have the smartest weapon to kill only combatants.
My question is this. Would the act of God removing life from the earth be evil?
Here's my thoughts on the matter. Since this whole discussion hinges on the assumption of God we are not going to debate his existence here.
1) Since God exists, he is the author and creator of all life. He quite literally formed life from nothing.
2) When life ends, it doesn't really end. It simply transitions into the afterlife.
Now, my view is that since God created all life, he should be entitled to removing it from earth whenever he wishes. The last time I discussed this with a non-theist, their reply was something like . . .
"So since my Girlfriend and I created my Son, I should be able to kill him?"
This reply was actually not really applicable. I explained to him that he and his girl didn't actually "create" his son. They came together and mixed DNA which was already part of their bodies and that in turn began the process of developing a child. However, this is not the same thing as taking absolutely nothing, and creating life from it. These are two different levels.
So humans, since they can not replace, create or recreate life on earth, nor can they reverse the decision to take life if they choose to, they should not be allowed to take life.
God on the other hand was the author of all life and since it was his creation, his own picture or house or whatever, he should be able to do what he wants with it.
An analogy would be should a person be allowed to destroy their own home that they built for themselves? Should a person be allowed to destroy their home and start over if the home isn't functioning correctly; if it isn't fulfilling the role of a house?
Ok now that I have opened up a huge theological can of worms (or vipers we shall see which), go for it. What do you all think?
