Balloon-Juice is developing questions for the candidates. Among them:
1.) “Would you have sex with a man to stop a terrorist attack?â€
2.) “If lowering taxes results in increased revenues then would lowering taxes to zero result in infinite revenues?â€
3.) “If you had a time machine, would you travel back in time and abort Bin Laden?â€
4.) “Would you torture and kill Jesus to ensure mankind’s salvation? And how does that work?â€
(For that last one, I’d follow up with “And would you wash your hands afterward?”).
2. Yes, but the next question should be:Where do these infinite revenues end up?
3.No,even though I am pro-choice, I’m not a doctor.
4.No, And those who tortured Jesus wouldn’t have done so either if they had known the consequences of their acts.I don’t know how it works and that’s the point.
4. No. But then again the whole Passion story shows us how mob mentalities work. It also gives us yet another glimpse into just how ruthless the Roman empire was in keeping Pax Romana. (A special thanks to Mel Gibson for beating those images into me).
1. I’d like to see Larry Craig answer this one;-)
2. Interesting…wish that would work with my checkbook!
3. No. Killing one fanatic does not rid the world of all fanatics.
4. (Second part) That’s a part of the mystery of faith. Christians believe that Christ’s blood was sufficient for the salvation of all humankind.
Rev…your post….
…..No. But then again the whole Passion story shows us how mob mentalities work……..
But shouldn’t that bother us that God used mob mentality to bring about the Salvation of mankind? It seems like He could have come up with a more suave plan.It smacks a little bit of the Bush Administration using mob mentality against gay marriage to get out the Republican vote in states like Ohio.
Lou,
There is a difference between “God used” and “God allowed”.
God allowed us to do what we often do; give in to the mob and ignore what is right. While the mob story is going on, there is also the story of Peter who swore hours earlier to never deny Christ, only to do so three times.
To me, the way it all unfolded was about a smooth as it gets. The way Christ was treated highlights why he was needed.
God knew in advance the way it would all go down; at least he did if he’s omniscient. So, if a person’s actions are known in advance, in what sense can they be said to have a real choice in the matter?
Doug,
You must really hate time-travel sci-fi! :)
To better explain, think of God as being a time-traveler. You and I know (or are pretty sure) that the US droped the atomic bomb in WWII. Does the fact that we know this mean they had no choice? If we could be teleported back to watch the decision be made (and keep silent), would we take away their free will?
Jason,
I’ve always had a problem with predestination vs free will( that is, ‘God used and God allowed’).God as a time traveler? God doesn’t have to time travel.God was, is, and always will be. Many seem to argue that God ‘chooses’ whether he is omniscient or not in any particular situation.That seems to be more in the image of a church leader than God. Historically it has been demonstrated that the institution of the church is just as apt to fire up the passions of the mob on its own behalf as it is to quell them.I do believe that we can be saved through God’s sacrifice of His Son,but it’s an individual choice and commitment,and from there comes the church. In other words much of the church is strangers who we may or not meet during life.The trouble with this kind of church is ‘where do I send the check?
Lou said:
Yes, I understand that. That was my point in the time-traveler example. If you exist outside of time, and time has no meaning, there is no past or future. Just because you have historical information of someone’s actions (from your point of view) does not deny them free will.
Trying to pull this back on-topic:
1. No (two wrongs don’t make a right)
2. No (That’s just dumb, and you can make other jokes like that with any politcal idea. Does unlimited welfare mean no more poverty?)
3. No (See #1)
4. My desire would be to be the type of person that wouldn’t do it, but my nature is one that likely would.