The ends justify the means?

[wizanda]

Can we achieve anything good by doing evil?

Not according to Jesus:
Luke 6:43 For a good tree brings not forth corrupt fruit; neither does a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.

Do you get Trees are religions?

Like Judah was a fig tree that brought no fruit, and thus was fertilized with Christianity; to see if it would bring forth good fruit, yet as this suggest, a corrupt tree brings forth corrupt fruit.

In my opinion.

 

[stvdv]

Do you get Trees are religions?
Like Judah was a fig tree that brought no fruit, and thus was fertilized with Christianity; to see if it would bring forth good fruit, yet as this suggest, a corrupt tree brings forth corrupt fruit.
In my opinion.

Nothing is true in this world. Everything is subject to change. Corrupt tree treated good become good, giving good fruits. Be Good, no need to be Christian

 

[wizanda]

Nothing is true in this world. Everything is subject to change.

That isn't true... Some things are Boolean; yet many are variables.

Corrupt tree treated good become good giving good fruits.

To treat a corrupt tree, we cut off all the corrupt branches, to stop the poison spreading; yet when the tree isn't cut back properly, and instead grows a second sprout of the bad branches, the whole harvest can become spoiled.

Be Good, no need to be Christian

These are diametrically opposed in my understanding, the Bible is a morality IQ test, and Christianity is a systematic test to see if people recognize they're not following Christ, yet the opposite.

In my opinion.

 

[blü 2]

Do the ends really justify the means? Can we achieve anything good by doing evil?

There are some situations where the end might justify the means. Consider the question:

Where's that atom bomb you planted under New York city set to go off at noon?​

If our suspect refuses to answer, to respond to bribes, to negotiate, to help in any way to prevent the disaster, is it fair to torture him or her? Not just thumbscrews and lit cigarettes but all the subtle stuff too?

Can you morally face the public and say,

No, even when all other avenues were exhausted, we didn't torture our suspect, because that would be wrong. Yes, the bomb went off at noon.​

?

 

[Augustus]

Do the ends really justify the means? Can we achieve anything good by doing evil?

The idea that violence can be used to progress Humanity has always proved to be appealing to utopians.

Whether this is chiliastic Anabaptist Christians in Munster, French Revolutionaries, Fascists, 20th C communists or countless other groups both religious and secular in nature, violence has been seen as a social cleansing agent. Violence could be a tool to fast-forward human progress by killing heretics, aristocrats, untermenschen, kulaks, clerics or other 'undesirables' who 'stand in the way of progress'.

In general, the argument that the ends justify the means fails because the ends are flawed in the first place and are never going to be reached. This tends to perpetuate the cycle of violence.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do the ends justify means?

You just insulted the bible.

How?

 

[Shushersbedamned]

How?

I no longer remember, please scroll back yourself if you're interested.

 

[Shushersbedamned]

There are some situations where the end might justify the means. Consider the question:

Where's that atom bomb you planted under New York city set to go off at noon?​

If our suspect refuses to answer, to respond to bribes, to negotiate, to help in any way to prevent the disaster, is it fair to torture him or her? Not just thumbscrews and lit cigarettes but all the subtle stuff too?

Can you morally face the public and say,

No, even when all other avenues were exhausted, we didn't torture our suspect, because that would be wrong. Yes, the bomb went off at noon.​

?

I don't think that makes it right.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I no longer remember, please scroll back yourself if you're interested.

That is why I wanted to know.

 

[Cooky]

I don't think that makes it right.

Yet, torture in that instance would be justified because it was an attempt to save a million innocent lives. I'd do it.

...It's why the context of Luke 6:43 matters. Jesus was not addressing "the ends justify the means". It was not even on his mind.

 

[Cooky]

That is why I wanted to know.

Why is it you wanted to know? Because someone didn't remember?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why is it you wanted to know? Because someone didn't remember?

Why is the OP insulting the bible?

Nothing fancy. Nothing sarcastic. A very direct question.

 

[Cooky]

Why is the OP insulting the bible?

Nothing fancy. Nothing sarcastic. A very direct question.

@Shushersbedamned was not referring to the OP. She was referring to post #2.

...Maybe that will help -if you read post #2 and consider a non-Christian attempting to dictate biblical scripture. It really is like a kind of Religious Appropriation.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

@Shushersbedamned was not referring to the OP. She was referring to post #2.

...Maybe that will help -if you read post #2 and consider a non-Christian attempting to dictate biblical scripture. It really is like a kind of Religious Appropriation.

I remember looking at the first page of this post about an hour ago, and read again wondering how. I know Im a non-christian and quote scripture all the time. Nothing serious.

 

[Cooky]

I remember looking at the first page of this post about an hour ago, and read again wondering how. I know Im a non-christian and quote scripture all the time. Nothing serious.

What..? I'm saying a non-Christian was *interpreting* scripture, calling it "nonsense", and claiming it was Jesus saying: "anyone who disagrees with you is a corrupt tree everyone who agrees with you is a good tree"... That's untrue and totally out of context. And for a non-Christian to make such a claim is a form or Religious Appropriation.

...Try reading the post that @Shushersbedamned was referring to again as it was quoted:

Oh no one agrees with that it's nonsense. He didn't mean it literally its a metaphor for "anyone who disagrees with you is a corrupt tree everyone who agrees with you is a good tree"... Basic evangelical teaching. Simple!!!!!

 

[Thief]

To treat a corrupt tree, we cut off all the corrupt branches, to stop the poison spreading; yet when the tree isn't cut back properly, and instead grows a second sprout of the bad branches, the whole harvest can become spoiled.

I think there is a parable somewhere......

something about ....digging around the root and applying dung
all in the effort to save the tree

 

[blü 2]

I don't think that makes it right.

You therefore hold that the end never justifies the means and it's tough when you lose New York and a million lives but sheesh, think of the alternative!

 

[Thief]

think of Sodom and Gomorrah

 

[Cooky]

You therefore hold that the end never justifies the means and it's tough when you lose New York and a million lives but sheesh, think of the alternative!

I agree with you... And Jesus never said that the ends never justify the means. He wouldn't, because he is expected to return here, and cast the bad souls into hell.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What..? I'm saying a non-Christian was *interpreting* scripture, calling it "nonsense", and claiming it was Jesus saying: "anyone who disagrees with you is a corrupt tree everyone who agrees with you is a good tree"... That's untrue and totally out of context. And for a non-Christian to make such a claim is a form or Religious Appropriation.

...Try reading the post that @Shushersbedamned was referring to again as it was quoted:

Its not that serious. Nothing above relates to anything I actually posted (as written only) just a simple how. (Tone of voice: inquisitive)