My Right To Kill You

One of the hardest arguments for those who lose their faith is often the moral one–which morality supersedes another? There’s actually some fairly straightforward answers but our hero will have to find that out on his own.

17 thoughts on “My Right To Kill You

  1. But God doesn’t order anything without reason! All of God’s commandments are for the good of humanity. He doesn’t order anything “because I said so!”

  2. So you’re saying “reason” is separate from God? Because how would you as a human know that, other rather how did you “reason” that? If reason isn’t separate from God than you’re just trusting God when he says he is good or when he says he does it for a reason. God doesn’t necessarily do what’s best for humanity, he does what’s best for him–he’s a jealous god who likes to be worshipped.

    Excellent, then I can judge His actions by reason. Collective punishment (Garden of Eden) is unreasonable. Noah’s flood was unreasonable (and illogical). Eternal Hell is unreasonable (eternal punishment for a limited crime with no appeals). We can find multiple examples of unreasonable Godly actions.

    Modern reason has nothing to do with the Bible. You’re reading about ancient morality that was unreasonable by our standards. Ancient standards say God is good therefore if God tells you to kill, you kill. Watch the movie “Frailty” with Bill Paxton for a better example as God doesn’t have to give a reason for his commands. It may be revealed later you’re killing was good, but then I don’t trust a God who leads a guy named Joshua into genocide (as if infants and toddlers are committing such atrocious sins they deserve to be put to the sword).

  3. Yes, if you beleive the Old Testement. I used to think like that too. But I read a book by Darren Hufford called the The Misunderstood God. He explains that much of what we’ve been led to believe about he Christian God is false. He is not jealous, proud, or spiteful like he is in the OT. The OT writers just got it wrong about Him. I get my inspiration from prayer, not form scripture so much.

  4. I’ll have to check out that book then–thanks for mentioning it! That’s a different scenario. Goodie (the peanut) is a Biblical literalist for the most part.

    But if we’re going to redefine God outside of the Bible then there really is no source material. It also doesn’t make sense to separate the OT from the NT as one is supposed to lead to the other. Prayer scares me even more because how do you tell a crazy person from a sane one when they both pray and God tells them to do something?

    You have to use reason again. Therefore, prayer is really just the hope that someone is hearing you. No one is actually talking back as Christians normally describe God as an inner voice of sorts (the same inner voice we all have, our own internal conversation).

    Without a Biblical standard, per the usual argument, if I say my right to kill you supercedes your right to live, who do you appeal to? (playing devil’s advocate, I’m posting new comic material that covers it).

  5. @Sean P. I guess you do know that different people who prays (elegy to the same god) gets very different answers. Some get the answer that they are supposed to be kind, while others that they are supposed to kill lots of people.
    Even when prayed for the answer to the very same question, different people gets different answers, even though the answers are mutually exclusive.

    By the way, the NT is also filled with absurdities and injustice (though not to the extent of the OT). For example it is there the concept of Hell (eternal punishment for finite crimes, an injustice of the highest degree) is introduced, and much of the immoral stuff from OT is confirmed.

    Luckily the judicial system do not care if you think you had permission of your god or not, and I think you do know why.

  6. If I prayed and got the message to kill someone, then I’d know at once that message did not comne from God! The main point of Hufford’s book is that God is Love. His instructions were to concentrate on the love you feel for humanity. That was when i experienced what think many other have the presence of the Holy Spirit. In other words, a spiritual awakening.

    Not all Christians beleive that hell is eternal. In fact I have a Seventh Day Adventist friend who doesn’t. The punishment (death) is eternal, but the conscious suffering is not. I’ve prayed about that too, but did not recieve a clear answer. One thing I’m sure of is that if hell is eternal–and I don’t think it is–then God is not omnipotent.

    Thank for being tolerant (I think) of me as a “moderate” Christian. Sam harris thinks moderates provide cover to literalists. There may be truth in that, but a lot of literalists see moderates like Rob Bell and Phillip Gulley as a dire threat.

  7. I really don’t have a problem with moderates in general, no literal hell or theistic evolution–I just don’t get it. I do think it is a possible stepping stone to understanding so if it is love you’re after you don’t necessarily have to seek God. But if this is how you understand love for the time being then just keep reading and exploring. As a former Christian I’ve found love and wonder without God.

    I do make fun of everything–even atheists on occasion–with my cartoons. I’m really just trying to provoke people into thinking or to correct me…or sometimes I just think something is funny. I will offend, but often it is meant to be good-natured. Literalist fundies are going to have a hard time with me and other atheists, but then even many of them I know have smiled at my humor or given me a jab back. If only they didn’t take hell so seriously it all really wouldn’t matter if we kid each other.

  8. @Sean P. Congratulations. When you concentrate on the love for humanity you for determine if an action is moral or not you use secular reasoning, as no god is required to do that. It is called humanism (something that can be either secular or religious).
    Continue to use reason.

  9. I just found a new book written in response to Rob Bell’s Love Wins. it’s purpose is defen the doctrine of hell. I’ve come to the conclusion that the reason conservative Christians defend eternal hell–whether it’s Biblicaly accurate or not–is cultural. The probelm is they think removing hell will remove the fear factor and fewer peole will convert.

    When I pray, I don’t use either reason or superstition. If I concencrate on love and postive emotions, the right answer will come to me. I’ll use a recent example that, come to think of it, kind of relates to this this comic. I had a disagreement on a horor forum recently over the death of character in a movie. This character was –I kid you not–an atheist kid, kinda like our hero here. the other guy cheered the kid’s death. I very nearly responded in anger. I prayed and found that have done so would have been wrong.

  10. Sean, what movie was that? That had an atheist kid killed? Just curious. Or anyone?

  11. The movie was Warlock with Julian Sands. That movie disturbed me the first time I saw it. If you think the movie was biased against atheists, some might disagree, but my personal opinion was that it was, given the entire context of the movie, who the Warlock’s other victims were. I did think that the death came off as a “punishment,” and that there was a cautionary note to NOT raise one’s children without God. Horror is a strange genre. It is famous for breaking taboos, yet there is no genre more Puritanical, no genre more anti-Enlightenment, than is horror. This is particular the case with Warlock. Without going into detail, the basic premise is that the Puritans were rigtht and we modernists are wrong, and beleiving in old superstitions is the only thing that keeps the world form becoming a crispy critter at the end.

  12. Yes, I remember that movie. I’ll have to watch it again. You’re right that a lot of horror is puritanical, often by accident (Friday the 13th, Halloween) as the directors wanted to put in sex before marriage in the films for the sake of sex and not as a message. Or they just wanted to choose our most vunerable moments that we might get killed, which usually means we’re naked somehow. Not to mention all the religious insertions of Good vs Evil.

    I’ll have to grab Warlock again for another view. I know if you’re looking for more cerebral horror to check out the Masters of Horror series where the directors are putting in all sorts of social and political commentary of their own. The kind that wouldn’t sell theater tickets which is why it is a cable series.

  13. The Puritanical nature of horror is usually not intended as a message, but it’s not exactly an accident either. It’s something to do with the genre itself. E. Michael Jones, a social conservative has a book called Monsters of the Id recently etitled Horror: a Biography), where he argues that the horror genre came into being as a subconscious rebellion against the Enlightenment, starting with Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.It found expression in movies during the seventies and eighties as a rebellion against the sexual revolution. He goes into a lot more detail than this, but horror usually helps the audience/writers deal with fears. And there is a general fear of societal change, and a tendency to idealize the past and stick to tradition. Thus, horror tends to be conservative. You can see it all the movies that are biased against science–but that’s a whole other topic.

  14. I couldn’t disagree with that, though I have to point out that a lot of horror exploits the fear “of the Puritanical.” Think Carrie for instance with the overtly religious mom or Misery with a woman who objects to swear words but will maim you (two Stephen King based movies BTW).

    Vincent Price played The Witchfinder General based loosely on true events and there are plenty of religious sadists to be found from early horror to contemporary. Also the theme of “family” which one might say is a common conservative value is readily attacked with horrific families such as Texas Chainsaw Massacre (or the more recent Devil’s Rejects).

    So I believe horror exploits fear in general and while it can be puritanical it also turns on the puritanical. Yeah, I don’t think it is necessarily intentional, just reflects the fears of the day. And society fears mad science but also fears religious fundamentalism–we’re all caught somewhere inbetween.

  15. I suppose that’s true. There was also a religous fundementalist lady in the screen adaptation King’s “The Mist,” who was truely scary and wasn’t let off the hook.

  16. Howdy just wanted to give you a quick heads up. The words in your post seem to be running off the screen in Ie. I’m not sure if this is a format issue or something to do with browser compatibility but I figured I’d post to let you know. The design look great though! Hope you get the problem solved soon. Kudos

  17. Compatibility issue, but I’m using the latest WordPress. I actually downgraded IE to an earlier version because it doesn’t work with Mobi Pocket Creator either (for eBook creation). Admittedly, I mainly use Google Chrome though.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *