From: MVS104@psuvm.psu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian
Subject: Re: Ends justify the means?
Date: 16 Nov 92 02:48:39 GMT
Organization: Penn State University

In article <Nov.12.02.49.57.1992.17069@geneva.rutgers.edu>,
DSIMON@thor.nafb.trw.com (D_SIMON) says:
>
>But fear can be valid, and as such it can be a valuable emotion.  If my
>doctor tells me I will die if I don't have surgery, is he "terrorizing" me
>into having surgery?  The more info we have, the better decisions we make.

Slight difference there. A surgeon could show you why you're going to
die, and so he isn't so much invoking fear on purpose. Can you show me
hell, so that I can see it's there? You're nothing like a surgeon in
that you have no proof to back yourself up. The analogy doesn't work.

>Knowledge of the existence of hell helps us make better informed decisions.

Yes it would--if anyone possessed it. You even say you _believe_ hell
exists, but you don't _know_ it, unless your definition of "know" is
quite loose. Knowledge would make us better informed, you're right about
that. The problem is that you have no knowledge to show me, only belief.

>Now you may argue about the existence of hell, but that's not the point.
>The point is that I believe hell exists, and as such I have a responsibility
>to inform people (or "terrorize" people, as you would say) about hell
>so that they can make better informed decisions.

You can inform people about your belief, but with the way you've confused
knowledge with belief, it's no wonder you think you're helping any.
How is it that you can admit you believe, not know, about hell, and one
second later go off preaching as if you do know?

>Some ends justify some means.  Other ends do not justify other means.  Each
>situation must be taken on a case-by-case basis.  I believe that using the
>fear of hell to motivate someone to Xianity is justified.  I do NOT think
>that this approach is the most effective.  I also think it can be overdone,
>so I don't think that "terrorizing" others into belief is justifiable.

So basically, what's wrong with god just proving himself to me? Much
less fear involved, I should hope. Why should the ends ever justify
the means? This is the same reasoning by which you condone innocent
babies being killed in fires. Then you say that the fear method is
justified, but it isn't. Which is it to be?

>You may think that mentioning the word "hell" is terrorizing.  I don't
>think that I'm a terrorist just because I believe in hell and express that
>belief and concern to others.

Perhaps if you didn't preach like you knew it was there, and you knew
I was going there, I couldn't consider it to be scare-tactics. But you
act as if you know, not believe, and consequently terrorism is precisely
what you are doing. I don't think the idea itself is all that scary,
mostly because this life can be rather hellacious. But if I knew it
existed, fear would be the primary motivation for staying out of it.

>> Or do you prefer to convert people through fear?
>
>I prefer to convert people through love.

So why use fear? Fear is the most common method I've seen used by
xians. Never saw it much from the inside, but once I escaped, fear-
based methods exploded in my face! I guess love only works on the
already-converted...

>As far as I can tell from your postings, NO ONE who "thinks it through"
>will be a Xian.

So what are you suggesting then? That I _not_ think it through? That
I simply abandon all I've learned, and become a xian? Or perhaps just
get a frontal lobotomy...

>Just because it doesn't work on you doesn't mean it won't work on others.

I'll make sure to inform my non-theist friends, just in case you try
to scare them into converting. But then, my friends tend to think, so
what am I worried about? You admitted that anyone who thinks your
religion through is going to reject it. Why don't you try thinking?

Martin Schulte