top of page
  • Facebook

Does the end justify the means?

Let us suppose that scientists are diligently at work trying to discover a cure for a dreadful disease. This disease severely affects the quality of life and eventually kills thousands of people every year. It is the educated guess of many scientists that a cure may be discovered through testing of tissue that is harvested from children under the age of 12 years. But there is a point of conflict: death is inevitable for the “donor” of this tissue. Law states that the parents have all authority concerning this decision. The child’s desires are not to be considered.

Would you sacrifice the life of one of your children for the possibility that thousands, maybe even millions of lives could be saved? What if it were a surety that a cure would be found through the death of your child? The scientists assure you that every precaution will be taken to make your child’s death peaceful. Does this information change anything concerning your decision? Does the end justify the means?

Would you have a problem if someone else sacrificed their child for the physical good of mankind? Suppose through the death of another person’s child you, or a loved one, might be cured; would that be acceptable? Does the end justify the means?

No God-fearing individual would consent or be agreeable to the advancement of medicine through the taking of innocent life. Those who would gently take the life of the innocent are just as guilty of murder as the barbarian who would violently hack his victim to death with a machete. All murderers will “have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8).

What appears to be a hypothetical question is actually a reality in the world today. The only difference in the scenario is the age of the child being murdered. The child’s desires are not a consideration. The doctor insists that the child will not feel any pain (proven to be false), and lifesaving medical research may occur as a result of murdering the baby. Does the end justify the means?

By God’s definition of life (conception, Psa. 139:13-16; Jer. 1:5), abortion does what God hates; sheds the blood of the innocent (Prov. 6:17). Abortion is murder.

Jesus was nailed to the cross by Roman soldiers, yet, Peter told the Jews on the day of Pentecost that they were guilty of murdering Jesus (Acts 2:36). Guilt traveled past the physical act of crucifixion to those who desired and approved of the sinful action.

There are those today who are not performing abortions, but desire and approve of the murderous act so that they might conduct medical research for the “good of all mankind.” They hide behind their desired results to cure diseases in hope that no one will question the murderous activity that made their research possible. Does the end justify the means?

Christians should have no part in supporting or encouraging, (financially or otherwise), any person or organization that hopes to provide good aided by sinful activity. Read the story of Uzzah (2 Sam. 6:1-7), and then answer the question, “Does God allow the end to justify the sinful means?”

80 views0 comments


bottom of page