Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Killing can be a result of defense. Shooting someone, by gun or arrow or whatever, is a means of defending someone from a distance and the end result may well be killing. If that is the result...you still consider that wrong? I honestly think you do. I honestly think you would watch someone die, even a loved one. Is that so? Or are you...gasp...being a hypocrite?
Defend or kill I said to your post.
In some situations it is.
false dichotomy
Follow me now...can be the same thing.
I am guessing you are from US. Killing seems to be quite easy over there, but it is still wrong, however inventive your examples might get.
Its a long answer, oh cute one.
But who then is God?
That is a story of Yisrael which is an example of man. we still kill. We still defend it. It is still wrong.
Killing is not easy anywhere. It may be easier for some people, but that goes for everywhere. I just now know so much more about what kind of person you are though. The sheer fact that you would let someone die rather than risk killing their attacker to save their life says wonders about you.
Now that would be a paradox I think.... so you are probably correct.
You think I am bad for saying don't kill. Immediately you go to the extreme and think up some story where you might have to. You can't think of defending someone without killing the attacker. But you have a gun or bow (which suggests you will kill) that just happens to be handy. You sound as though you should be in the Police force.
Absolutely you can. I avoid using the word in discussion of morality because it is so vague and subjective. My opinion is much broader than most, including starting a war and elective abortion and capital punishment and introduction of carcinogenic chemical into the environment. Not everyone agrees with me.
Not only is that extremely superficial, but scripture does not say that. The lack of clarity is a huge moral problem for people who rely on Abrahamic scripture for their moral code. It is just too primitive and subjective and self-contrdicting to work in the modern world.
"Murder" is "unjustified/unlawful killing". So, what might be considered "murder" to some, might not be to others. Thus, it is still subjective. You have to be more specific.
If there is "plenty to back it up", can you provide said support?
He has to be. What is, has to come from something it can't come from, doesn't it? Where is the birth of freedom without it?That God is a paradox? Of course I am correct.
Ciao
- viole
