Missing somthing about the golden rule

[carn]

The golden rule is not only found in the gospels, but humanistic philosophers also see it as a basis for society.

But many people seem to see much more in it, thatn i can see there, concluding many things that in my eyes do not follow from the rule. Maybe they are based on something else.

Take for example torture or death penalty. Many people seem to think that the golden rule requires to treat all humans with respect and that as no one would want to be tortured or executed, this is never allowed.

I never understand that, because if i ever turned depraved enough to kidnap a child and imprison it with limited supplies somewhere and 4 cops got hold of me and had undeniable evidence of my crime, do you know what i expect the 4th cop to spend his time with during interrogation?

Read up on thumbscrews and the like, because three are enough to waterboard me.

And in case i start talking too late and the child dies?

Find a rope and a tree and spend the money for lawyers and courts on counseling for the victims family.

And i would consider this a respectful treatment, because most respect is shown to people by helping them acting in a moral way and treating them justly.

Of course i know other reasons, why in the above scenraio the cops should not do this:
a)Its not only my decision, how i am to be treated, it must also be in accord with God’s laws.
b)Cops sometimes suspect the wrong person.

But none of these reasons have anything to do with the golden rule. So others seems to see something in the golden rule, that i am missing. Any idea what it is?

 

[GEddie]

Even in the situation you describe, torture would not be allowed. Not only might they get the wrong person, a human being will lie to avoid physical pain; making it useless.

If everybody lived by the golden rule, obviously you would have the ideal society. However, we have the other version; “He who has the gold makes the rules.”

ICXC NIKA

 

[JRKH]

First of all - in so far as the Golden Rule not being in the Gospels…It permeates all of Christ’s teachings, even if it is not expressed verbatim…
Love your neighbor as your self…
Love your enemies…
Judge not lest you be judged, for the measure you use will be used to measure you…
These and many others speak to the Golden rule.

Now - on to what people are missing.

Too many people try to make the Golden rule something that it is not. They try to make into “treat others as they treat you”…Or even worse (and all of us have heard this corruption) Do unto others before they do it to you…

The Golden Rule, like all Christian teaching, is not concerned with the external, temporal life. It is concerned with the interior life. It is about what we believe and do and act. It is not about how others respond.
There will be those who take advantage of us. That is not our concern.
There will be those who consider us foolish or naive. That is not our concern.
Why is it not our concern?
Because their response is not where our justification lies.
Our justification lies in the rule itself and our conviction of the truth of it.
We know this to be true because our King, the Son of the almighty and living God has shown us the truth of it.

Man will always try to twist God’s truth to fit himself. Sometimes to his own destruction. This is a fault that we all must beware of.

Hope some of this helps.

Peace
James

 

[Buck_Crosswhite]

The golden rule is not only found in the gospels, but humanistic philosophers also see it as a basis for society.

But many people seem to see much more in it, thatn i can see there, concluding many things that in my eyes do not follow from the rule. Maybe they are based on something else.

Take for example torture or death penalty. Many people seem to think that the golden rule requires to treat all humans with respect and that as no one would want to be tortured or executed, this is never allowed.

I never understand that, because if i ever turned depraved enough to kidnap a child and imprison it with limited supplies somewhere and 4 cops got hold of me and had undeniable evidence of my crime, do you know what i expect the 4th cop to spend his time with during interrogation?

Read up on thumbscrews and the like, because three are enough to waterboard me.

And in case i start talking too late and the child dies?

Find a rope and a tree and spend the money for lawyers and courts on counseling for the victims family.

And i would consider this a respectful treatment, because most respect is shown to people by helping them acting in a moral way and treating them justly.

Of course i know other reasons, why in the above scenraio the cops should not do this:
a)Its not only my decision, how i am to be treated, it must also be in accord with God’s laws.
b)Cops sometimes suspect the wrong person.

But none of these reasons have anything to do with the golden rule. So others seems to see something in the golden rule, that i am missing. Any idea what it is?

You need to google Kenneth McDuff.

 

[carn]

Not only might they get the wrong person, a human being will lie to avoid physical pain; making it useless.

An error many repeat. Its not true. Real life case:

11-year old boy is abducted, parents find message demanding ransom money. Police observes place of money transfer and a suspect collects the money. Police continue to observe hoping he now goes, where the victim is hold hostage. Suspect instead books some holiday trip. Police arrests him. He does not deny abducting the boy, but is silent about his whereabouts. Police gets the impression he might still be alive and that suspect is playing with them, probably enjoying the power over life and death he has. They try (nearly *) alll legal options to make him talk. It fails. Police officer tells him “We will make you suffer pain like you never experienced in your life.”, because he believes he is weak willed and will collapse under pressure. He is correct, a few minutes later the suspects leads the police to the place where the boy is hidden.

You have it all in real life, certainity you have the criminal, his unwillingness to cooperate, all other attempts failing, a life in danger for all you know - and the threat of torture works.

The unhappy detail, which also allows the idea tortue never works to continue - the boy was murdered on the day of abduction.

(*This point was, what lead to a sentence for the poilice officer. If the court had found that he realy tried everything, he might have been spared any punishment.)

And regarding the golden rule, about 70-80% of the population thought the police officer did the correct thing. Therefore with 70-80% of the population the golden rule would not lead to forbidding torture, because those people were under some circumstances in agreement with doing it to others, so logically they would also accept it for themselves.

(That forbidding torture can have other reasons is obvious - just not from the golden rule.)