What significant moral difference is there between Saddam Hussein and Billy Graham, since both of them, being human, fall so vastly short of the moral perfection of God? Surely, if humans are so evil and depraved that all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags in God’s sight, the relative moral difference between their actions must fade to insignificance when compared with God. Furthermore, it should be noted that while reactionary Christians generally consider Mr. Graham to be a moral person, Mr. Hussein has committed no atrocity or “evil” act (aside from things that weren’t technologically possible at the time, such as chemical warfare) that is not also attributed to at least one of the great “heroes” and kings of Israel in the Old Testament, who are nonetheless considered to be generally righteous and admirable by traditional Christians. What does this say about traditional Christian morality and intellectual honesty?
Posted on: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 04:43:36 +0000