Christians: Saving the Damned?

[Drich]

then what does it matter who dies?

So you wouldn't save either?

No one dies before their time. No one lives beyond their alotted time. we all die. It's not like any effort I could put fourth would extend anyone eternal life. So even if I saved 4 or 100 people they would all eventually die anyway. So again If this was just 104 random people and I was made to choose I would refuse to play.

[genkaus]

then what does it matter who dies?

So you wouldn't save either?

No one dies before their time. No one lives beyond their alotted time. we all die. It's not like any effort I could put fourth would extend anyone eternal life. So even if I saved 4 or 100 people they would all eventually die anyway. So again If this was just 104 random people and I was made to choose I would refuse to play.

So, you would let all of them die.

[Drich]

then what does it matter who dies?

So you wouldn't save either?

No one dies before their time. No one lives beyond their alotted time. we all die. It's not like any effort I could put fourth would extend anyone eternal life. So even if I saved 4 or 100 people they would all eventually die anyway. So again If this was just 104 random people and I was made to choose I would refuse to play.

So, you would let all of them die.

What you all fail to see is the illusion of control you are exercising in this scenario. You are not saving anyone you are murdering either 4 or 100 people. If you say or do nothing, then those who kill the 4 or 100 are the murders. So the only honorable answer is to "not play" this sick game.

Truthfully are you so deceived by simple wording you do not see your willing participation in the murder of a family of four or 100 random people?

[genkaus]

then what does it matter who dies?

So you wouldn't save either?

No one dies before their time. No one lives beyond their alotted time. we all die. It's not like any effort I could put fourth would extend anyone eternal life. So even if I saved 4 or 100 people they would all eventually die anyway. So again If this was just 104 random people and I was made to choose I would refuse to play.

So, you would let all of them die.

What you all fail to see is the illusion of control you are exercising in this scenario. You are not saving anyone you are murdering either 4 or 100 people. If you say or do nothing, then those who kill the 4 or 100 are the murders. So the only honorable answer is to "not play" this sick game.

Truthfully are you so deceived by simple wording you do not see your willing participation in the murder of a family of four or 100 random people?

Interesting how you are dancing all around the issue on a simple yes/no question. So, in conclusion, you would refrain form making a choice, thereby leading to the death of 104 people.

[Godscreated]

I have a question for Christians out there.
I know only Christians won't vote or reply, I do understand this is an atheist forum, but I do encourage everyone to give their opinion, but would like only Christians to vote.

This is purely theoretical and similar scenarios could happen one day.

If it was a life or death situation for a group of 100 atheists (all strangers), or a family of four that are Christians, (all strangers again) and you could only save one group of them, who would you save?

Would you save the lives of 4 Christians over 100 atheists?

Or would you chose the lives of 100 civilians over 4?

Being they are strangers, I would have no idea which were Christian and which were Atheist, so I would choose the 100 people, because at the time it would be the greater good. Here's an example of the way a Christian is to react, Luke 10:25-34, please read to see why I said what I said. Just a few verses, promise they want hurt.

[Drich]

Interesting how you are dancing all around the issue on a simple yes/no question.

What is interesting is how you have justified the murder of 4 to save 100 or how you would be a willing partisipant in the murder of 100 to save 4. This is what happens when your version of righteousness is based on the morality of your peers. All any of them has to do is rephrase the act of murder by saying you will save one group or the other, and you would just slaughter the other group for whatever trivial reason you have created for yourself.

So, in conclusion, you would refrain form making a choice, thereby leading to the death of 104 people.

So in conclusion as i have said 3 times now; I would not play this game. That means whom ever was looking for my partisipation in the murder of one group or another would have to kill both, and let all of the blood fall of their own hands.

[Godscreated]

Truthfully are you so deceived by simple wording you do not see your willing participation in the murder of a family of four or 100 random people?

No one said they were going to be murdered, I actually thought of an accident happening to them.

[genkaus]

What is interesting is how you have justified the murder of 4 to save 100 or how you would be a willing partisipant in the murder of 100 to save 4. This is what happens when your version of righteousness is based on the morality of your peers. All any of them has to do is rephrase the act of murder by saying you will save one group or the other, and you would just slaughter the other group for whatever trivial reason you have created for yourself.

Except, failing to save someone is not the same as murder.

So in conclusion as i have said 3 times now; I would not play this game. That means whom ever was looking for my partisipation in the murder of one group or another would have to kill both, and let all of the blood fall of their own hands.

That shows a distinct lack of moral character. Obviously, you are not held accountable for death of the 100, the 4 or the 104. Not saving anyone is not the wrong thing to do, but it is also not the right thing to do - it is amoral. Its your cowardice to act that is immoral.

[Loading Please Wait]

The point was to see if Christians count as "more of a person" than an theist to themselves.

How many atheists is worth the life of 1 Christian was more of what I was going for.

[Godscreated]

The point was to see if Christians count as "more of a person" than an theist to themselves.

How many atheists is worth the life of 1 Christian was more of what I was going for.

Without the situation that you gave I would not play that game, it is not man's right to chose who's worth more to whom in a life and death situation. The reason I answered the question, is because all were strangers.