Originally posted by Sparko
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Theology 201 Guidelines
This is the forum to discuss the spectrum of views within Christianity on God's foreknowledge and election such as Calvinism, Arminianism, Molinism, Open Theism, Process Theism, Restrictivism, and Inclusivism, Christian Universalism and what these all are about anyway. Who is saved and when is/was their salvation certain? How does God exercise His sovereignty and how powerful is He? Is God timeless and immutable? Does a triune God help better understand God's love for mankind?
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
While this area is for the discussion of these doctrines within historic Christianity, all theists interested in discussing these areas within the presuppositions of and respect for the Christian framework are welcome to participate here. This is not the area for debate between nontheists and theists, additionally, there may be some topics that within the Moderator's discretion fall so outside the bounds of mainstream evangelical doctrine that may be more appropriately placed within Comparative Religions 101 Nontheists seeking only theistic participation only in a manner that does not seek to undermine the faith of others are also welcome - but we ask that Moderator approval be obtained beforehand.
Atheists are welcome to discuss and debate these issues in the Apologetics 301 or General Theistics 101 forum without such restrictions. Theists who wish to discuss these issues outside the parameters of orthodox Christian doctrine are invited to Unorthodox Theology 201.
Remember, our forum rules apply here as well. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Lying for the sake of life
Collapse
X
-
As a general rule, withholding the truth is as much a cruelty as presenting it crudely. There's no good way to say 'you have x and it may kill you' but that doesn't justify saying it badly. To have any chance at all, the patient has to know - even if it's just the chance to come to grips with a terminal diagnosis."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostAs a general rule, withholding the truth is as much a cruelty as presenting it crudely. There's no good way to say 'you have x and it may kill you' but that doesn't justify saying it badly. To have any chance at all, the patient has to know - even if it's just the chance to come to grips with a terminal diagnosis.
Now he did die from the lung cancer, but the doctor could have been less blunt. "I'm sorry but from what we have seen the outlook is not that good. We can try various things to slow the cancer down, but we don't believe it can be cured at this stage" or something like that. not, "You are going to die"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostOriginally posted by lee_merrillNo, but lying is evil--what other sins would be allowed in order to save an innocent life? Stealing? Adultery? Murder?
Can you kill someone to defend yourself?"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
You never lived in Nazi Germany. My mom did. It was horrible. If you had a child and no food, would it be a sin to take a loaf of bread from someone who had too much to feed your child? You are defending a life right? If you can KILL to defend a life and it not be murder, why can't you steal or lie to save a life and it not be a sin? How is it different?
Comment
-
"That is to say, we shouldn't need to steal in order to provide for our own or another's needs." Seems to presuppose that we live in a just society, in which there is no need to steal to meet the most basic needs for life.
But what if one is faced with the conditions in which theft is the only means of meeting the needs of the family? Assuming that the theft does not deprive someone else of those mist basic needs.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou never lived in Nazi Germany. My mom did. It was horrible.
If you had a child and no food, would it be a sin to take a loaf of bread from someone who had too much to feed your child?
You are defending a life right? If you can KILL to defend a life and it not be murder, why can't you steal or lie to save a life and it not be a sin? How is it different?
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by simplicio View Post"That is to say, we shouldn't need to steal in order to provide for our own or another's needs." Seems to presuppose that we live in a just society, in which there is no need to steal to meet the most basic needs for life.
But what if one is faced with the conditions in which theft is the only means of meeting the needs of the family? Assuming that the theft does not deprive someone else of those mist basic needs.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI'm sorry for her.
Yes, it would be stealing, and the Lord promised to provide for those who seek his kingdom and his righteousness.
Or committing adultery? Some things are sins always, and I believe we will never be forced to choose between sins.
Blessings,
Lee
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostSo why is killing to defend a life OK but lying to defend a life not OK? "some things are sins always" is not an answer. Killing someone is a lot worse than lyiing to them!
So does this clarify my argument? We do need to know if something is always a sin.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostOr committing adultery to defend a life? And let's say killing someone is worse than committing adultery.
So does this clarify my argument? We do need to know if something is always a sin.
Blessings,
LeeIf it weren't for the Resurrection of Jesus, we'd all be in DEEP TROUBLE!
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostOr committing adultery to defend a life? And let's say killing someone is worse than committing adultery.
So does this clarify my argument? We do need to know if something is always a sin.
Blessings,
Lee
If you think it is OK to kill someone to defend an innocent life, why is it not OK to lie to someone to defend an innocent life?
Here is a situation. You are hiding a jew from the Nazi's. They are going around rounding them up and shooting them on the spot. A Nazi comes to your home and searches your house and is about to discover the jew who he will kill.
You can
1. Kill the Nazi, thus defending the Jew's life. You already said this is not murder and therefore not a sin.
2. Lie to the Nazi, thus defending the Jew's life. This way the Nazi AND the Jew live. and you. everyone lives.
or 3. You can tell the truth and the Nazi will kill the Jew and then probably you. Everyone but the Nazi dies.
Now explain to me how #2 is the sin here and why #1 and #3 are more preferable?
no more deflecting to adultary or whatever you want to use to not answer directly.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sparko View PostYou keep deflecting and not answering me.
If you think it is OK to kill someone to defend an innocent life, why is it not OK to lie to someone to defend an innocent life?
Here is a situation. You are hiding a jew from the Nazi's. They are going around rounding them up and shooting them on the spot. A Nazi comes to your home and searches your house and is about to discover the jew who he will kill.
You can
1. Kill the Nazi, thus defending the Jew's life. You already said this is not murder and therefore not a sin.
2. Lie to the Nazi, thus defending the Jew's life. This way the Nazi AND the Jew live. and you. everyone lives.
or 3. You can tell the truth and the Nazi will kill the Jew and then probably you. Everyone but the Nazi dies.
Now explain to me how #2 is the sin here and why #1 and #3 are more preferable?
no more deflecting to adultary or whatever you want to use to not answer directly.
This became a crucial point in Christian persecutions, where all they had to do was to say "Caesar is lord" and burn a pinch of incense in order to save themselves and their families.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostBecause lying is always a sin, and as Christians, we have renounced sin.
Because lying is forbidden (God cannot lie), #2 is a sin, and #1 and #3 are not. We are not to sin, even to save ourselves or another person.
This became a crucial point in Christian persecutions, where all they had to do was to say "Caesar is lord" and burn a pinch of incense in order to save themselves and their families.
Blessings,
Lee
Murder is a sin too. And if you could avoid killing someone by telling a lie then you needlessly took his life. I am talking about the Nazi here that you could have lied to instead of killing to prevent him from killing the Jew you were hiding. If you kill when you don't need to then that is murder too right? so wouldn't #1 be a sin too then?
You also seem to think that taking a life is not a sin if you do it in self defense. But lying is.
Look at it like this: Either killing someone is still a sin no matter what (you purposefully took someone's life!) but is it allowable in self-defense or it is not a sin at all if done in self-defense even though the action is the same as the sin (taking a life) - just the motivation is different.
Lying could be the same: Either lying is still a sin no matter what but it is allowable to save a life (like Rahab did) or it is not a sin a all if done in self-defense. The motivation is different.
Comment
widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
Comment