Shushersbedamned
Well-Known Member
Wow wow, jeez - slow down. How did we get here?You therefore hold that the end never justifies the means
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!
Wow wow, jeez - slow down. How did we get here?You therefore hold that the end never justifies the means
Do the ends really justify the means? 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.
I think the fruit and root discussion is more "fruitful" when used to test false beliefs. For example, certain cults bring destruction on themselves and others, false fruit, false root.
Its not that serious. Nothing above relates to anything I actually posted (as written only) just a simple how. (Tone of voice: inquisitive)
The Flood.Do the ends really justify the means? Can we achieve anything good by doing evil?
Lysistrata is also a fun read.Honestly, I'm quite suprised that a play written 2500 years ago is right on par at being a hollywood quality movie today!
Torture doesn't work, statistically speaking. The real world isn't a TV show or action movie.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.
How do you think that verse suggests "the ends don't justify the means?"Do the ends really justify the means? 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.
The STS9 episode "Under a Pale Moon" comes to mind. The Federation, aligned with the Klingon Empire, are losing a war and devastating losses are adding up. The only way to turn the tide and stand a chance at winning is the get the Romulans to end their position of neutrality and turn on the Dominion, who they have been friendly with. So, Captain Sisko, knowing what he is about to do is immoral, unethical, and even illegal, employs the assistance of former Obsidian Order operative Elim Garak. What follows are black market deals, deception, forgery, and assassination. But the Romulans end up joining the war. And while reminiscing about it, Sisko basically declares "screw the morality behind it, I'd do it again." And why not? The Dominion was ultimately defeated, and defeated by lies and deception.
Good point: if the Bible is right, then God's the "tree" and we're the "fruit."so the great flood was for nothing?
Was expounding on the parable... It isn't to save the fig tree (Judah), it is to test if the tree can produce any good fruit, even after being cut back, and fertilized.I think there is a parable somewhere......
something about ....digging around the root and applying dung
all in the effort to save the tree
Do the ends really justify the means? 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 the ends really justify the means? 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 the ends really justify the means? 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.
Well in that case I would argue that torture is not really "evil". The person's blood is on their own head because they refuse to tell you where the bomb is. They brought it on themselves.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 agree with that. I believe they did not have a good idea because they are incapable of having a good fruit because they're a corrupt tree. But furthermore, even if htey did have a good idea, yet it would end up being corrupted because the people who have advanced their own idea have become corrupt themselves. Even Neitzsche said: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.
I believe it has multiple possible applications and shouldn't be limited to just the most obvious interpretation alone.I agree. It was never meant to be inserted in an
'ends justify the means' debate. The parable has it's own meaning, right where it belongs in its own context.
Well you're defining bad for us. I would say God is a better judge of good and evil than you are.The Flood.
The Crucifixion.
Israel's entire existence.
Clearly, doing bad things is how God does "good" all the time and then He wonders why the results aren't up to snuff.
I'm saying when people corrupt themselves in order to achieve something they think is good then they should not expect anything good to come of it. Because they've corrupted themselves. How can they suddenly switch back to being good once they've achieved their objectives? Once someone is corrupted then they are going to have a hard time making themselves good again.How do you think that verse suggests "the ends don't justify the means?"
To me, that verse suggests the opposite: if the fruit is good, you shouldn't take issue with the tree.
I agree that some good things can always come about. A silver lining you know.I agree with Jesus, evil cannot be won by becoming evil. That would be logical fallacy.
But perhaps some good things can happen, even if evil is done.
Well I think you're misunderstanding because according to the Bible people can change and they can become a good fruit tree if they repent. However my argument is against people who think they can switch back and forth between corrupt and good whenever it suits their purposes.People aren't fruit trees.
Any man is capable of both good and evil. This is a really, really bad simile IMO of course. May cause you to right off folks who may just have been in bad situations.
Doesn't it contradict the crusafiction of Jesus?Do the ends really justify the means? 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.
I believe that Jesus was God manifest; so it was an act of goodness on His part. He gave Himself to show His love, devotion and forgiveness. (Philippians 2:6-8)Doesn't it contradict the crusafiction of Jesus?
Unless Abusing and killing Jesus was an act of goodness?
So you just gave yourself an answer.I believe that Jesus was God manifest; so it was an act of goodness on His part. He gave Himself to show His love, devotion and forgiveness. (Philippians 2:6-8)
Why?think of Sodom and Gomorrah