Murder vs. Force

[ElenaMason]

If you've seen the movies, Saw and Saw 2, this thread will make more sense to you, but to those who havent:

the thought came to me the other night about this movie. and its basically about a so called serial killer that doenst kill his victims. he forces them into a situation where they DO have a way out, and they either choose to solve the puzzle and escape within the set time stated, or let time go and die.

Now what gets to me is, is the serial killer actually wrong in what he was doing? More specifically...did he trully sin on any account?

Murder is the malicious intent to kill someone's life, but Jigsaw (nickname of the killer) didn't want to kill his victims...in a way he was actually trying to help them, those he deemed "unworthy" of life: drug attics, gluttons, peeping toms...that of the like. All he really does is set up an insane puzzle that isn't that hard to do *mentally* and they are given a choice and a way out.

His puzzles are mainly meant to test the mind of its "natural" will to live.

We mainly suffer because of 1) our own fault or 2)because of mankind.

the only real sins i could see the guy commiting is against the commandment "love thy neighbor"...that includes not putting them in a desperate situation. he didnt murder his victims...cuz they did have a choice...he didn't really hurt his victims while thye were awake, cuz some of his puzzles involved him....*cough* altering their bodies to fit the puzzle he set for them *cough*.

You'd have to see the second movie to hear the intentions behind his puzzles which i found rather interesting, but i honestly cant see THAT much wrong in what he did, except the way he set up his puzzles cuz man, some of them were a bit grotesque >>


(For those who havent seen the movies...heres some examples of the puzzles he set up for his victims.....SPOILERS!)

Crack Addict: her head was strapped to a device that within 60 secounds would crack her jaw open...and practially off. in other words its a reverse bear trap...for a human head. to open the lock on her head device, the key was inside a man on the floor next to her...inside his stomach. and she had to use a scaple to open his stomach WHILE he was awake to get the key. he was dopped and drugged up though, so he couldnt feel anything. btw..she did manage to escape.

Peeping Tom: guy who would watch peopel for al iving....i think i have the right guy, but he's another head device victim but instead of reverse bear trap, it was a helmet that was already open but had spikes in it, and within a specific amount of time it would close shut onto his face. however....while he was knocked out, Jigsaw surgically replaced the key to open the device under the skin of his right cheek bone...well not UNDER the bone but like on top of it. And the victim had to look into a mirror and use a scaple to cut it out to get the key before the time ran out.

Due to his FEARS...he wasn't able to do it and so the device closed on his face.


These people either died or escape becaus they were able to overcome their fears and pain or choose to go WITh the fears and die. They all had a choice and so was Jigsaw really wrong? When your faced with a life and death situation it makes you look at life differently (i should know cuz i HAVE been in one). However not everyone learns the lesson either. The Drug Addict Victim escaped.....but she took up drug addicting habits again...and boom she was a victim again in the second movie.  

[Seority]

-x> O__o

Well, it did teach the lesson right? rolleyes
I think putting a person into a place where they have high chances of dieing is plainly sinning.
Also, like the girl oviously showed, that this experience did nothing for them. All it did was make their surgen skills better, or killed them. It was ment for total horror, and the only reason they had a drug addict and a peeper was because we all have problems which we we will deal with sooner or later if we don't decide to give them to God.
It seems like Jigsaw was trying to play God in your opinion. He thought that by punishing the wrong doers it would set them striaght. No person has the right to play God.
Okay now your thinking "Well, heck. Don't you have a high risk of dieing no matter where you go? Also, then why do we throw people in jail if you concider that playing God?"
What Jigsaw did was put them in a situation where they either figured out the problem, or died. Nothing else. He quessed that they could figure out. God never puts us in a trail we can not handle. How? He does because he's the only one that knows you fully. Jigsaw could of got all the info ever pulled together about those people, but still not have the whole picture that only God has.
That's why it was definetly a sin, but I highly dought that Jigsaw was Christian. Since he probably isn't (heck, he doesn't even exisit!), God's rules don't apply to him. Meaning, he sins all the time and it's not a crime to him until he faces judgement.

 

[Tarrou]

Well, 'love your neighbor' is rather an important commandment, but I digress.

As far as I'm concerned, the fact that this killer gives his victims the opportunity to save themselves doesn't really mitigate his culpability. From a philosophical standpoint, he is infringing on people's right to liberty—and believe me, abducting, drugging and confining people against their wills is an abrogation of that right—with an eye toward depriving them of their right to live as well. And the fact of the matter is that, regardless of whether or not his victims have the chance to escape, he is still responsible for putting their lives in danger and, as such, bears the blame should they fail his little tests and die. After all, they clearly would still be alive but for his actions. Furthermore, I should point out that in the case of the crack addict, the woman in question had to kill someone in order to save herself; so either way you slice it, Jigsaw has had a direct hand in the death of a human being there.

Then there's the question of proportionality: is being a peeping Tom or a junkie really a grave enough sin to warrant such harsh treatment? They're certainly not savory hobbies, but as no reasonable individual would ever consider putting people to death for engaging in them, I'm inclined to say that Jigsaw's methods go well beyond any sane definition of justice or necessity.

Finally, there's the unpleasant stench of eugenics hanging around this whole business. Talk about playing God—deciding who lives and who dies based on one's own ideas about who is an who is not worthy of living. Not a pleasant road to go down, that.  

[ioioouiouiouio]

I didn't kill that man, the bullet did.

That, in a nutshell, is the logic that would clear Jigsaw of wrongdoing. However, the fact that it was Jigsaw who pulled the theoretical trigger means that he was guilty. Regardless, Jigsaw's traps are a perfect example of a sin of omission, that being the good that Jigsaw didn't do (namely, save those people).

You must remember that the Bible isn't a legal code. Sin is something that severs our relationship with God and, as such, you don't just find loopholes. The 'Technically, I didn't' arguement doesn't stand in the face of God's judgement.

Oh, as a note, the heroin addict was captured for cutting herself in the second movie, not returning to drugs.  

[ElenaMason]

Cometh The Inquisitor

I didn't kill that man, the bullet did.

That, in a nutshell, is the logic that would clear Jigsaw of wrongdoing. However, the fact that it was Jigsaw who pulled the theoretical trigger means that he was guilty. Regardless, Jigsaw's traps are a perfect example of a sin of omission, that being the good that Jigsaw didn't do (namely, save those people).

You must remember that the Bible isn't a legal code. Sin is something that severs our relationship with God and, as such, you don't just find loopholes. The 'Technically, I didn't' arguement doesn't stand in the face of God's judgement.

Oh, as a note, the heroin addict was captured for cutting herself in the second movie, not returning to drugs.

ah i see....very interesting inputs. thanks for the piece of mind ^^ iwas just curious about the subject cuz in the movies they kept calling him a serial killer, but he didn't actually kill his victims. he just forced them into a life or death situation that gave them a way out.....a very....disturbing way out >>

p.s. Cometh....oh yeah....forget abotu that xP they were good movies wink  

[ioioouiouiouio]

SaintChaos

p.s. Cometh....oh yeah....forget abotu that xP they were good movies wink

Yeah. I had read the plot to Saw before and the ending still freaked me out.

Oh, and they're making a Saw III.  

[Raishon]

Cometh The Inquisitor

SaintChaos

p.s. Cometh....oh yeah....forget abotu that xP they were good movies wink

Yeah. I had read the plot to Saw before and the ending still freaked me out.

Oh, and they're making a Saw III.

It does say to not fill your brain with things that are bad. Notice how preachers do not condone watching movies of the sort. (Most preachers. Some do what they want and are not good leaders for the people in the church they serve God).

I don't find how you can write on the topic of the Bible, and then write how you liked those movies that don't please the lord. You first tell some things to help a person, but you then give the person the ideas that "even though the man is doing wrong, the movies are good and you can watch them"

How do you know other people reading this won't decide "hey, he watches it, so that means I can too". What if they do out and then years down the road they are in a bad time in their life, remember what things they saw from the movies, and decide to execute them.

How would you feel knowing you told somebody it was alright to fill their mind with evil content, and then know you were the person that gave them the information they used to commit bad deeds.  

[Raishon]

Tangled Up In Blue

Well, 'love your neighbor' is rather an important commandment, but I digress.

As far as I'm concerned, the fact that this killer gives his victims the opportunity to save themselves doesn't really mitigate his culpability. From a philosophical standpoint, he is infringing on people's right to liberty—and believe me, abducting, drugging and confining people against their wills is an abrogation of that right—with an eye toward depriving them of their right to live as well. And the fact of the matter is that, regardless of whether or not his victims have the chance to escape, he is still responsible for putting their lives in danger and, as such, bears the blame should they fail his little tests and die. After all, they clearly would still be alive but for his actions. Furthermore, I should point out that in the case of the crack addict, the woman in question had to kill someone in order to save herself; so either way you slice it, Jigsaw has had a direct hand in the death of a human being there.

Then there's the question of proportionality: is being a peeping Tom or a junkie really a grave enough sin to warrant such harsh treatment? They're certainly not savory hobbies, but as no reasonable individual would ever consider putting people to death for engaging in them, I'm inclined to say that Jigsaw's methods go well beyond any sane definition of justice or necessity.

Finally, there's the unpleasant stench of eugenics hanging around this whole business. Talk about playing God—deciding who lives and who dies based on one's own ideas about who is an who is not worthy of living. Not a pleasant road to go down, that.

Peeping Tom or not, the Bible says "a sin is a sin". Sins have no size. God does not render one sin worse than the other.

Everybody sins, yes? Yes is the answer. Labeling a sin worse than another just shows that you sinned. The Lord does say he is the only one that may judge others. You saying one sin is worse than another is just saying "God said sins are the same, but I know more than him so I'm saying your sin is worse than da da da sin".
You are then insulting God by what you did. Not that you may have tried it, but you still did wrong.

Note: My words may seem harsh, but I do not mean to insult anybody or yell at anyone  

[ElenaMason]

Cometh The Inquisitor

SaintChaos

p.s. Cometh....oh yeah....forget abotu that xP they were good movies wink

Yeah. I had read the plot to Saw before and the ending still freaked me out.

Oh, and they're making a Saw III.

lol i know XD the second movie left on a cliffhanger razz  

[ElenaMason]

Raishon

Cometh The Inquisitor

SaintChaos

p.s. Cometh....oh yeah....forget abotu that xP they were good movies wink

Yeah. I had read the plot to Saw before and the ending still freaked me out.

Oh, and they're making a Saw III.

It does say to not fill your brain with things that are bad. Notice how preachers do not condone watching movies of the sort. (Most preachers. Some do what they want and are not good leaders for the people in the church they serve God).

I don't find how you can write on the topic of the Bible, and then write how you liked those movies that don't please the lord. You first tell some things to help a person, but you then give the person the ideas that "even though the man is doing wrong, the movies are good and you can watch them"

How do you know other people reading this won't decide "hey, he watches it, so that means I can too". What if they do out and then years down the road they are in a bad time in their life, remember what things they saw from the movies, and decide to execute them.

How would you feel knowing you told somebody it was alright to fill their mind with evil content, and then know you were the person that gave them the information they used to commit bad deeds.

first off, i know the difference between REALITY and a piece of fictional work. yes, movies have violence and of the like, but i said it was a good movie because it had an interesting plot line. but all the violence in there is fake and neither do i fantasize about hurting others in REAL life about the same fashion they were hurt in the movie.

do movies/videogames/tv shows cause me to go out and do the same things that are done on fictional shows? no....i just watch shows that are interesting to me because i feel like it. nothing more nothing less.

people dont have to come into a forum online and see a thread that would make them interested to go rent the movie. the previews for the movie was all over tv LAST year. so its not like its something new anyway.

your taking it a bit too far.

might i add, the bible states that to hate evil is to respect/love god. seeing the movie Hostel for example was a fresh reminder to me of what humanity can trully be like. for those who have seen the movie Hostel, i wouldnt be surprised if things like that actually happened before in real life. people have been tortured and of the like. Hostel was jsut a fresh reminder of how sick mankind can really be, making me hate mankind even more.......the evil of mankind that is. thus respecting god even more. so playing the devil's advocate, you could say the movie actually helped me to come closer to god if you wanted to get more techinical then needed razz  

[Tarrou]

Raishon

You are then insulting God by what you did. Not that you may have tried it, but you still did wrong.

Judging by this and other posts you've made in this thread, I'm going to prescribe a course of getting off your bloody high horse. Take two doses of humility and call me in the morning.
I mean really, I wasn't even talking about sin; I was referring to secular law, which, thank God, is a bit more forgiving than whatever draconian code you'd like bend us to. And then to start telling people that their mass media drugs of choice, derivative and uninteresting though they may be, don't 'please the [L]ord'—as if you received a weekly newsletter from God outlining His film 'Picks and Pans' of the week—is just the height of bad manners. So, if I may be blunt: get stuffed. If I want a dose of holier-than-thou patronization, I'll watch Pat Robertson, thank you very much.  

[divineseraph]

i don't care how much of a loophole it is, it's still not right by any means. ******** loopholes, if you need to justify it that much it's wrong.  

[ElenaMason]

divineseraph

i don't care how much of a loophole it is, it's still not right by any means. ******** loopholes, if you need to justify it that much it's wrong.

o.o....i hope your not referring to me. if your are, may i reiterate that im not trying to justify......wrong word...im not trying to say that what the guy did was entirely right...i find it more of a debate than anything else...something interesting to discuss since this guild is filled with people i deem good debaters and insight i find enjoyable to read, such as Tangled Blue here smile *hugs the blue*  

[ElenaMason]

Tangled Up In Blue

Raishon

You are then insulting God by what you did. Not that you may have tried it, but you still did wrong.

Judging by this and other posts you've made in this thread, I'm going to prescribe a course of getting off your bloody high horse. Take two doses of humility and call me in the morning.
I mean really, I wasn't even talking about sin; I was referring to secular law, which, thank God, is a bit more forgiving than whatever draconian code you'd like bend us to. And then to start telling people that their mass media drugs of choice, derivative and uninteresting though they may be, don't 'please the [L]ord'—as if you received a weekly newsletter from God outlining His film 'Picks and Pans' of the week—is just the height of bad manners. So, if I may be blunt: get stuffed. If I want a dose of holier-than-thou patronization, I'll watch Pat Robertson, thank you very much.

omg thank you. i was going to respond to what he said....but decided not to. but you took the words right out of my head....STOP READING MY MIND! xD  

[Tarrou]

Oh, yes. And do mind your language, divineseraph. It'd be much appreciated if you would just stick to euphemisms.