WHEN HEAVEN LEADS TO MURDER - JANZEN MURDERS HIS DAUGHTER FOR FAITH
The doctrine that we live on after death means that killing is not killing. If people go to eternal bliss then killing them is doing them a favour.
The doctrine certainly tells us that murder is not really murder. It is luck that people don't take it seriously enough to do harm with it though they think they do. It is not the doctrine. It is luck. It is the people. The doctrine remains appalling and some do kill or let others die. Mormonism used to murder certain sinners in the belief that if they spilled their blood they would atone their sin and go to Heaven. Gary Gilmore is a well-known instance. Christian Science lets sick people die without a doctor for it thinks death is not real. The Bible says God praised Abraham for being ready to kill his young son Isaac. God asked him to. Hebrews says that this was because he believed God who promised to make a nation of the grown-up Isaac. To kill him meant that for God to keep his promise he would have to revive him back to life. So the New Testament is admitting that belief in an afterlife can lead to murder.
In 2015 Canadian man, Janzen, murdered his poorly daughter and put the following
on facebook, "I just could not see my little girl hurt for one more second. I
took a gun and shot her in the head and now she is migraine free and floating in
the clouds on a sunny afternoon, her long beautiful brown hair flowing in the
breeze, a true angel."
Naturally his faith in Heaven is to blame for this. He was not posting the above
to get sympathy or to justify what he had done. He did not ask for them. He did
it to show his faith in Heaven.
Atheist blogger J.T. Eberhard wrote, “The culpability for this is, at least in
part, on the people who filled Janzen’s head with promises of heaven – even if,
like Janzen, they did it out of love.”
Christians claim that he wouldn't have murdered her if he had rejected belief in
a good afterlife. But only Janzen can tell us and he did. He said as much.
People who would ignore a man's testimony in order to deny that faith in Heaven
can harm are too biased and low to be worth mentioning. If faith in Heaven
helped this man to kill we are expected to enable it to help others to kill by
pretending it had nothing to do with it.
It was argued by Christians that blaming faith in Heaven is committing a logical
fallacy called the appeal to consequences.
Belief in Heaven for this man caused or encouraged him to murder.
Therefore belief in Heaven is false.
In actual fact Eberhard is not committing a logical fallacy at all.
Belief in Heaven for this man caused or encouraged him to murder.
Therefore belief in Heaven is HARMFUL for some people.
Therefore belief in Heaven is always risky.
The Christians told a bare-faced lie and dished out a red herring.
Some Christians argued that true beliefs can result in terrible things and bad
or false beliefs can cause many good things. This is true. You cannot work out
if a belief is untrue by assessing how bad the consequences of it are.
The Christians point out that some people who deny there is a life after death
have committed suicide because they felt they would never again see their loved
ones who have died. You could reason then that whether you encourage belief in
Heaven or not it is not going to make much of a difference.
A Christian could argue that if some of these people had known they could see
their child again in heaven they would not have killed themselves.
Unbelieving people who miss their loved ones and commit suicide are doing
something very odd. It is killing the memories they have of the loved ones and
robbing themselves of any way to keep their memories and their contribution to
life alive. It is far more irrational than killing yourself to go to Heaven to
be with them again. The unbelievers do not kill themselves because they won't
see their loved ones again - they kill themselves because they are excessively
stupid and irrational.
There are murderers who said they killed people because they did not believe in
an afterlife. But they are few and far between. The murderer who does believe is
far more common and believing that you have not really murdered somebody but
sent them to a better place cannot be seen as anything other than
Eberhard blogged “You want to know why I fight religion with all that I am?
There it is. It teaches people to embrace bad ideas, to believe because you
want to believe, to cast aside critical thinking in favor of faith.”
Christianity does confess that discarding critical thinking is dangerous and
claims that people should look for and equip themselves with evidence that their
beliefs are true. But in practice this is a rarity. And Catholicism is careful
to gain supporters not through faith but by conditioning them as children and
imposing a membership on them in the Church. Worse, nobody is told why they
should stay out of the Church. An honest religion would present both sides.
Catholic children are never told for example how Jesus supported the murders
committed by Judaism at the behest of his God.
Eberhard is accused of saying that religion is bad because some will kill others
to put them in Heaven. This is supposed to be as irrational as saying, "Do not
say it is a sin for gay people to have sexual relationships with each other.
Some people might be overcome with shame and commit suicide." How can religion
then avoid Eberhard's judgement? It depends on how remarkably good and
convincing the religion is. Catholicism for example is no better than any
organisation. And all religions suffer from delusion. They care little for
evidence except when it suits them. Eberhard is right and his argument is not an
argument from bad consequences.
Religion says that we should not abandon beliefs that seem to drive some people
to do bad things. But that depends on how well verified the beliefs are. The
worse the evidence the more the religion is to blame if any members use the
beliefs to do bad. Religion will say that some scientists use science to foster
racism and that gives one no call to abandon science. It is not the same thing.
A scientist can only distort science to foster racism. Nobody is a racist
because of science.
Religion says that killers are stealing God's authority to decide when somebody
should leave this world. If they think they are killing for God or that they
have the divine right to then they are killing because of a false belief. They
cannot be accused of intentionally sinning. You have to do what you believe.
Religion is useless as a deterrent. It is a waste of time telling the would-be
killers that it is up to God to end a life.