SUNSTONE said:
Some times it is a sin, not to kill someone.
Really?
Are you sure it's "not killing" that's the sin, and not "not defending someone else from them"?
Is there any circumstance in which you can prevent someone from doing any harm without killing him, but not killing him would be a sin?
Some times we have to judge people.
Except for the part where it's absolutely forbidden to us, sure. So, I mean, except for every instant of time from before there was time until after it ends, yes, there's probably a lot of times when we have to judge people. They're just not actually within time as we understand it, I guess.
Like a rapiest, you can't reason with them, so you must jail them to help stop a very bad sin.
Well, gosh. I know a few people who will be very unhappy to learn this.
The existence of sentences other than life sentences is rooted in a belief that you can, in fact, reason with people, and that they can learn.
In fact, most people (those who aren't genuinely crazy, anyway) can indeed be reasoned with. In fact, someone's been healing terrorists, by telling them the truth and reasoning with them, and he's got a pretty good track record.
If God wanted us to be passive "all" of the time, then He wouldn't have put Romans 12 in there.
There are options other than "passive" and "murderous".
Martin Luther King was not "passive". Neither was Gandhi.
Some times stopping a person we only need to say something. Some times we need to scream, sometimes we need to fight, and some times we need to kill.
Let's say I grant this for the sake of argument.
That doesn't give us any way it can be moral for someone to love the killing. To accept it as a heavy burden, yes. To talk about it as an enjoyable and fun activity... That's unhealthy. And immoral.
