Which one of these men will you kill...if either?

by Terry 112 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  PSacramento

  It amazes me how some can have such a "cavalier" attitude towards death and in particular, killing.

  Allow me to say this, the taking of a life will be with you FOREVER and you will have to live with that and answer for that.

  Never, ever, have the notion that killing is 'easy" or that it can be "justified" and that, somehow, that makes it bareable.

  Certainly at times, when we have no choice, we may have to make the ULTIMATE decision and take soemthing that we can never give back.

  I pray that NONE here will ever have to go through that.
• 

  NeckBeard

  Neither. It is immoral to take a life without facts.

  Many that live deserve death. Some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo? Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise cannot see all ends.
• 

  Terry

  In MORAL problems such as I posed in the opening statement there is a tendency among certain persons to SQUIRM.

  Instead of playing by the rules they invoke the Shatner "cheat" in real life.

  Nothing wrong with an outside-the-box strategy effort.

  But, a rule broken is a rule broken.

  What if we let runners in a football game run out of bounds with impunity? The game changes and the score changes and pretty soon we don't

  have Football as we know it. What do we have? A game with chaos.

  This is what life could be without Rules and Social pressures: CHAOS otherwise known as..............ANARCHY.

  What is anarchy if not the Darwinian principle: SURVIVAL of the Fittest. (Fit means you get your way...somehow/anyhow you are able.)

  All any society really is at baseline is the sum total of its civilizing rules AS PRACTICED by the citizens.

  Once any group, tribe, society or nation privately sneers at the rules for themselves while insisting on those rules for the "OTHERS"

  violence has been done to the social contract.

  This leads to resentments. This leads to double-standards. This leads to class-envy. It leads to uncivil discourse, unfairness and ultimately internecine war.

  I pose the problem of WHICH ONE OF THESE MEN WILL YOU KILL simply to get you to see what kind of thinker/problem solver you are at heart.

  Are you one who SQUIRMS?

  Or, do you play by rules?

  Interesting.....eh?
• 

  PSacramento

  I think it is a good thing that we "squirm" before we decide a course of action, especially one that can result in injury or death and I am glad that the notion of "surival of the fittest" is one that we have "evolved" from.

  I am glad for these things and so should the vast majority of people here, LOL !

  I had this discussion with a friend of mine a while back, he said that, of all people, I should be pushing for a return to the "survival of the fittest" mindest and leave this "wimpy christianity" aside, LOL !!

  Maybe he was right !
• 

  Pika_Chu

  Okay, here's a thought. We can gather in groups of 3, pray over the matter, and pull a decision out of our asses reach a conclusion using Holy Spirit. Lol.
• 

  Pika_Chu

  Sorry. Being serious is hard.
• 

  AGuest

  In MORAL problems such as I posed in the opening statement there is a tendency among certain persons to SQUIRM.

  Ummmmm... shouldn't EVERYONE faced with your scenario (and similar) squirm, dear Terry (peace to you!), regardless of their ultimate decision? Given what's occurring around the globe today... and yesterday... and 10 years ago... and 100 years ago... etc., there's not enough folks squiriming, IMHO. Maybe never has been.

  Peace!

  A slave of Christ,

  SA, who agrees with dear PSacto: folks who've never killed another human always seem quick to say what they "would" do in a situation that might call for it... but really have no idea. Those who say they would kill most probably wouldn't... and those who say they would never do so, just might surprise themselves...
• 

  NeckBeard

  Now I realize it doesn't really matter what you think you SHOULD DO if it isn't in your nature to actually DO it.

  That is because you are a coward. I would have broken lots of bones in your situation if I could. Nobody is going to rape me without getting the maximum resistance from me possible to stop it. I'm a natural born killer if killing is called for. However, the fact is, killing someone on a coin flip is evil. I choose to kill neither. If that serial killer goes off and kills 11 people, that is on him, not on me. However, if I catch the killer in the act and only deadly force can stop him, then I kill kill kill, and no, I will not feel guilty.
• 

  Terry

  Now I realize it doesn't really matter what you think you SHOULD DO if it isn't in your nature to actually DO it.

  That is because you are a coward.

  I'm not sure what being a "coward" is in a situation such as I was in.

  Refusing to be inducted into the Military, facing the draft board, being questioned by the F.B.I. and standing before a District Judge and then spending

  time in County Jail and entering Federal Prison took a certain amount of personal fortitude, wouldn't you say? It wasn't heroic, certainly. I did what I did at the time because I believed I was doing the "right" thing (as I understood "right").

  The District Judge had told me in no uncertain terms: "At anytime if you wish to be released from prison you can send me word and I will have you out that same day." All I had to do was agree to serving ALTERNATE SERVICE by going to Terrell State Hospital for two years in lieu of Military Service.

  So, to my thinking, a coward would have taken that as an "out".

  As far as physically harming the guy who grabbed me it was a moment of IF/THEN which I did not fully understand, but, which was singularly clear.

  Whatever Violent thing I must do was not the FIRST THING I should do.

  Had he not relented, I may well have been forced into violent resistence.

  As it was, although traumatic, it turned out allright.

  I'm not sure how cowardice enters into it, frankly.
• 

  Terry

  Never, ever, have the notion that killing is 'easy" or that it can be "justified" and that, somehow, that makes it bareable.

  Hard to say, but, my strongest possible guess is this: if I witnessed somebody doing something violent to one of my daughters I don't think

  I would have it in me NOT TO do violence to them instantly. I can't imagine being able to restrain myself.

  That same "instinct", however, doesn't seem to be there when only I am involved in the threat.

  Peculiar at the very least....