If God told me to kill you...

Wow, it has been over a year since my last post. I guess I need to work on my consistency.

Anywho, recently two men for whom I hold a great deal of respect were given the opportunity to debate publicly about Christianity and the resurrection of Christ. During the course of the debate J.T. Eberhard, a renowned atheist speaker and blogger, asked Bill Victor, a PhD wielding campus minister, "If God told you to kill me, would you?" Victor, being less seasoned in debate than J.T., struggled with the question. I have since recommended to Bill that he borrow a line from The West Wing and declare "I do not accept the premise of the question" anytime he is thrown a curve ball from a Cy Young debater like J.T.  However, I do not think that dodging this question is the only right answer. Sometimes it is better to let yourself get beaned with the pitch so you can take a free base. It will probably hurt - especially with a guy like J.T. who is capable of applying some real heat, but if you are ready to parry the question then the pain will be worth it.

The face value answer to J.T.'s question looks tricky, but it needn't be. If you accept the basic premises of the gospel then you believe that: A. Everyone is a sinner deserving of death. B. God is just in requiring anyone's death at any time. C. God is just in using whoever He so desires to bring about that death. D. God is morally superior to man in all ways. E. It is better to obey God than man/civil authorities. So, if you really believe these things then you ought to be able to honestly answer "yes." If God told me to kill you then I would try my best to kill you.

However, there is a secondary question that must be posed at this point (or you and I run the risk of looking like a crazy person) - What is necessary for the premise "God told me to kill you" to be rationally justified? What sort of experience would you and I have to endure in order for our belief in God-sanctioned manslaughter to be deemed rational?

This is an interesting question. Unlike J.T.'s curve ball, this question is more than just a club to scare away theists - it actually has some meat on the bone. Answering this question could actually serve to advance the dialog between atheists, theists, and agnostics.

So, if you are ever asked the question "If god told you to kill me, would you?" Respond with "Yes, but under what circumstances would it be rational for me to believe that God has actually told me to kill you?"

Then wait for a response.

If he admits that there is no such scenario then you have demonstrated that his epistemology precludes the possibility of Christianity outright, and he is therefore begging the question. If rationality is so defined such that it is impossible to accept the proposition "God is communicating with me and telling me X" then the definition of rationality, rather than rationality itself, is opposed to Christianity. Who gets to define what is rational? Well that is the question that your opponent fellow truth-seeker is begging.

If he offers a scenario by which one could rationally accept the premise "God told me to kill you" then compare that to the experiences of the disciples - was it rational for them to believe that Jesus was the Son of God who rose from the dead? How could that scenario make god-sanctioned manslaughter a rational belief, but hold that the Corinthians were irrational to believe in the resurrection of Christ, despite the fact that they were privy to hundreds of eyewitnesses to the event in question? This certainly won't silence whoever you are debating, but it does take the discussion in a profitable direction.

If When the person you are debating turns the question back onto you, explain honestly what it would take for you to believe that God actually told you to kill him. Personally, for me it would take a highly extra-ordinary experience comparable to the Apostle John's in Revelation. It is possible, but extremely improbable.

What do you think? Am I crazy? Is it better to just dodge the original question?