Could Suicide Bombers be the Saints of the 21st Century?

  • Thread starter Thread starter MumboJumbo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MumboJumbo said:
So what is the pecking order in religions?

Jesus, then saint, then ordinary human?

Some christians consider anyone “born again” a saint.
Click to expand...
The pecking order is God and not God. Jesus is God. Everyone else is not God.

Biblically, saint is used to describe faithful followers on earth and those who have died on earth but are alive in Christ. Modern usage limits it to those who have died on earth but are alive in Christ in heaven.

Those who use the term only to mean believers are only half correct according to the bible and not even close according to conventional usage.
 
ralphinal said:
MumboJumbo;5121992:
No, his actions do not proove sainthood. Sorry, they do not.

Sainthood is more than dying for what is right. Sainthood is being an example of the life of Christ to such a level that there is no doubt that the person is in heaven. It does not matter how or when he died. What matters is if he was the best example of Christ he could have been. To that end, one typically needs miracles performed in their name to show sainthood. He has none. He is considered a martyr by a handfull of denominations, but that does not proove anything, either.

Again, killing innocents is ALWAYS evil. ALWAYS. ALWAYS. ALWAYS.
Click to expand...
What would you say of Winston Churchill who knew Coventry was going to be bombed but kept silent because if he warned the people of Coventry, the Nazis would know that the allies had cracked their code.

He had to live with the knowledge that innocent lives had to be taken for a higher purpose.
Click to expand...
 
MumboJumbo said:
What would you say of Winston Churchill who knew Coventry was going to be bombed but kept silent because if he warned the people of Coventry, the Nazis would know that the allies had cracked their code.

He had to live with the knowledge that innocent lives had to be taken for a higher purpose.
Click to expand...
That illustraits the principle behind the law of double effect.

However, did he have to allow it to be bombed? Did he have to leave the people totally unprepaired?

And, Chuchill did not take the lives. The poor excuse for excrament known as suicide bombers ARE the killers. They decide who has to die so that their cause may be furthered.
 
ralphinal said:
That illustraits the principle behind the law of double effect.

However, did he have to allow it to be bombed? Did he have to leave the people totally unprepaired?

And, Chuchill did not take the lives. The poor excuse for excrament known as suicide bombers ARE the killers. They decide who has to die so that their cause may be furthered.
Click to expand...
And so drug dealers don’t kill people, people commit suicide using drugs. The drug dealer is just another businessman servicing the needs of the public. He forced no one to get hooked on his poison.
 
MumboJumbo said:
And so drug dealers don’t kill people, people commit suicide using drugs. The drug dealer is just another businessman servicing the needs of the public. He forced no one to get hooked on his poison.
Click to expand...
Not even close. I am scared as to how you can come to this conclusion.

A drug dealer makes a decision that he does not care how many lives he ruins or what damage he causes, as long as he gets his.

When all the drug dealers are in hell, we shall see where their money helps them
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top