Why is murder wrong?

[AqD]

@basics do you suggest that sending a person to heaven is wrong?

[conon394]

Except there was no intent to murder and so negligence. If you can’t grasp the difference between these two ideas I’m not sure that this discussion goes any further.

Reminds me of the Socratic discussion about a theoretical death of spectator at a javelin throwing event at the games and the punishment. Who is to blame and what is the appropriate punishment for said person. Of course Plato gives several foils for Socrates to demolish, first the easy, blurted out it was the Javelin thrower and murder. I recall they end up that was the official in charge of organizing the event for not insuring his underlings did a proper job of keeping the crowd at a safe distance - heavy fine for negligence (and I think loss of civic rights since the accident with have polluted the ritual basis for the games).

To step away from the religious argument. How about a cultural one based on most of the time we were small bands of hunter-gathers. Give the high overall natural mortality rate. True it might have been a bit lower since 'plague type' events would not have been going from city to city - but children and pregnant women would still drop like flies. A Band is pretty tight extended family that can ill afford to loss of a healthy individual. Also there is not a lot to kill for what possessions, or power? I would imagine killing in such a situation would shock the entire band to its core. It would have to wrong I would think at visceral level something that could simply not be accepted in any case internally. That says nothing about how you deal with other bands.

[Swaeft]

Swaeft,

The greatest Law of all given by our Creator is that murder is wrong and that supersedes anything else made by man.

Umm, I was actually referring to laws created by a Parliament and their various equivalents, and I don't really want to go into the religious nature of laws, or religious laws, because to me those are part of their own section, and shouldn't be lumped together with laws passed by men.

That being said I'm not saying they are wrong or shouldn't be considered as laws, they should be, but as religious laws that aren't binding to people who aren't a part of that religion. Which means they aren't binding to a lot of people, so it's not really a great argument, if you don't mind me saying.

[Prodromos]

To step away from the religious argument. How about a cultural one based on most of the time we were small bands of hunter-gathers. Give the high overall natural mortality rate. True it might have been a bit lower since 'plague type' events would not have been going from city to city - but children and pregnant women would still drop like flies. A Band is pretty tight extended family that can ill afford to loss of a healthy individual. Also there is not a lot to kill for what possessions, or power? I would imagine killing in such a situation would shock the entire band to its core. It would have to wrong I would think at visceral level something that could simply not be accepted in any case internally. That says nothing about how you deal with other bands.

What about an unhealthy individual that is just endlessly taking up resources? Would it be wrong to kill them?

[Swaeft]

What about an unhealthy individual that is just endlessly taking up resources? Would it be wrong to kill them?

This is an interesting topic that I'd like to weigh in on, though I'm not very sure it is relevant to the OP as it isn't necessarily considered as murder. Could you be a little more specific? Does the person have family to make that decision for him, etc? I feel that if that person is paying for medical care or has trusted family members to make that decision for him, then it would be wrong to 'kill them off'.

[Aexodus]

What about an unhealthy individual that is just endlessly taking up resources? Would it be wrong to kill them?

That is an example of Fascist collectivism, putting the group interests ahead of the individual's interest. The sad thing is, such practice is still popular today. When taken to extremes, it justifies murder.

There is a large difference however, between this, and assisted suicide. Murder is a violation, suicide is not.

[Gaidin]

This is an interesting topic that I'd like to weigh in on, though I'm not very sure it is relevant to the OP as it isn't necessarily considered as murder. Could you be a little more specific? Does the person have family to make that decision for him, etc? I feel that if that person is paying for medical care or has trusted family members to make that decision for him, then it would be wrong to 'kill them off'.

Typically(having been through a number of surgeries): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanc...care_directive

Though, at some point if things go sideways for long enough, there is some family member that does have Power of Attorney and/or Health Care Proxy, even if not legally appointed by the patient in a document, they are that person legally(husband, next of kin), and can make decisions when the patient can not. It's lead to some nasty fights where even political powers try to get involved.

The comparison to Nazi Euthanasia is a little wack. Because these days when it comes up there is a totally different and unique debate.

[Swaeft]

The comparison to Nazi Euthanasia is a little wack. Because these days when it comes up there is a totally different and unique debate.

Right, how I didn't spot that obvious distinction baffles me. And then it probably should not be in this thread, but a thread of its own.

[Gaidin]

Right, how I didn't spot that obvious distinction baffles me. And then it probably should not be in this thread, but a thread of its own.

It is nothing.

The point is when it comes up today it is about a persons health and not their genetics or ability to perform. Nazi really isn’t a thing. It’s about whether honest to god the person wants to live.

[basics]

@basics do you suggest that sending a person to heaven is wrong?

AqD,

Why would that be wrong if we consider the only way to get there is to be born again of the Spirit of God. What that means is that entrants have had their sins washed away in the blood of Jesus Christ. No matter what they did in this life once washed God doesn't even remember them as having been sinners and so they have eternal life with Him as Adam could have had in the garden had he not fallen. So, while murder in our time is wrong like any other sin it can be righted by the blood of Christ.

[Swaeft]

AqD,

Why would that be wrong if we consider the only way to get there is to be born again of the Spirit of God. What that means is that entrants have had their sins washed away in the blood of Jesus Christ. No matter what they did in this life once washed God doesn't even remember them as having been sinners and so they have eternal life with Him as Adam could have had in the garden had he not fallen. So, while murder in our time is wrong like any other sin it can be righted by the blood of Christ.

- - -

[Sar1n]

- - -

First time seeing basics' post?

[Swaeft]

First time seeing basics' post?

Guilty as charged...I don't know what to feel.

[Aexodus]

AqD,

Why would that be wrong if we consider the only way to get there is to be born again of the Spirit of God. What that means is that entrants have had their sins washed away in the blood of Jesus Christ. No matter what they did in this life once washed God doesn't even remember them as having been sinners and so they have eternal life with Him as Adam could have had in the garden had he not fallen. So, while murder in our time is wrong like any other sin it can be righted by the blood of Christ.

So murder is okay if you become a born again Christian.

[Sar1n]

Guilty as charged...I don't know what to feel.

Don't mind him. He's just self-absorbed in his religious beliefs based on Bible and his personal delusions that have no point of contact with reality or logical system, so his mind lives in a parallel reality. Or maybe perpendicular, sometimes I can't even tell .

[Prodromos]

Yeah, that basics fellow sure is crazy for *squint* believing in repentance and forgiveness. As we all know, the right thing is to never repent and to never forgive.

[Aexodus]

Yeah you really have to squint hard to see that

[Gaidin]

Yeah, that basics fellow sure is crazy for *squint* believing in repentance and forgiveness. As we all know, the right thing is to never repent and to never forgive.

Look man, I've seen repentance and forgiveness Christians. When you go to a Southern Baptist boarding school you can't throw a stone without hitting five. None of them approached adding the sheer level of mythological whathaveyou to the Bible that he does. If you rewrote the Bible with what basics believes it'd be twenty times longer.

But that's fine. He can believe that. I will have fun occasionally poking holes in it for the other readers of this site.

[Prodromos]

What part of basics's post has no basis in the Bible?

[basics]

So murder is okay if you become a born again Christian.

Aexodus,

Well, if one believes our coming into being is pure chance then murder has to be OK but if one believes as I do in a God Who created us all and He says as He does that murder is wrong then it must be wrong. All sin has to be paid for by individuals so if God had not died for those sins everyone would be going to hell. Being separated from God is just as bad as being a murderer in His eyes and that is where being born again of His Spirit takes away any sin thus restoring that person to God. Dies that make murder OK? No it doesn't any more than any other sin is OK. A sinner has to repent of his or her sin acknowledging that Jesus Christ paid the price of it for them before regeneration can take place. Now that may sound whacky to many of you but it is what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is all about. It is what is written and what can be experienced to prove its authenticity.