The Perplexed Torturer

"I'm really sorry about this" Bob told the young girl.

The girl was gagged and tied to a chair in a small, dark, concrete-walled room. Bob stood in front of her with a pair of pliers and a blowtorch.

"I'm going to have to torture you now", he said. "I really don't want to do this, but if I don't, they'll torture me, and you, and if I kill you outright, they'll torture me anyway."

Bob knew the girl was innocent, but the Head Honcho didn't concern himself with these pesky details. "'No loose ends", he said.

"My price is blood", said the Head Honcho to Bob earlier, "...guilty, innocent...(he shrugs), 'doesn't matter to me, but my price is blood and it will be paid."

"I am really sorry about this, but you see my dilemma, don't you?", asked Bob as he wrenched one of the girls fingernails off her hand, with her screaming with horror and wide-shocked eyes. "I could strangle you out of mercy, but I can't strangle myself too you see".

"I'm going to have to burn your eyes out of your head with this blow torch". "I'm sorry, but you're going to be tortured either way, and it makes no sense for me to be tortured and die needlessly". "You see, this is the best way." "This way, one person will live un-tortured, and one will be tortured, whereas if I don't torture you, they will anyway, and torture me too, and if I kill you, they'll torture me, so one person not tortured and one person tortured is the best of all outcomes, so hold still."

"Hell, I'll even make it slightly less horrific for you than the person that would replace me", Bob said. "I'll only break half of the teeth in your mouth with these pliers." "You can at least feel relieved that me doing this to you will prevent me from being tortured too, right?" "I mean, you can see that I really have no choice, right?"


People have been telling themselves this since there have been human atrocities against other humans. From Nazi middle-men to those in war-time situations and "field conditions", people have been excusing away their own guilt in situations like this.

But, isn't it TRUE that Bob "has no choice in the matter"?

No. The mistake Bob is making is that HE is responsible for his own actions, but not the actions of others. By surrendering his own moral responsibility, he is making the evil system he's caught up in his system. He's making himself an accessory to evil, and thus accepting the status of "evil person" himself. And by surrendering his own freewill and moral responsibility, he's making himself a slave to an evil Head Honcho, who only cares about getting SOMEONES blood to "pay the price", whether the blood comes from the guilty or the innocent.

Christians make the same mistake Bob is making.

Innocent Jesus "already died", they say, "so it would be senseless for me to go to hell since he's already died whether I accept this 'gift' or not" they say.

Well, what they are missing is that they are making themselves an accessory to an evil action, when they condone and even exploit a situation where the Innocent (Jesus) is tortured and dies and the "guilty" who condone this action are rewarded by entrance into "paradise".

Does Bob REALLY have a choice?

Yes, and the price of freedom is death perhaps. Bob is only a slave if he GIVES UP his freedom of choice to the Head Honcho.

Ditto for Christians.

If Adam and Eve chose to not remain slaves to the will of 'god' in the Garden of Eden, they will "surly die that day" they are told. They are only slaves IF THEY CHOOSE TO BE, i.e. if they surrender their freewill and instead subjugate their will to the will of their Lord and Master.

Modern day Christians face the same dilemma. Either they surrender their will to their Lord and Master and condone and exploit the torture and death of innocent Jesus, or they will suffer some sort of 'god'-torture themselves; (hell/Hades/lake of fire/absence from the presence of 'god', take your pick).

In theory, Christians are no less guilty than Bob is in the catch-22 scenario above.

When faced with the choice of being a slave to a Head Honcho who demands the blood of someone...(and doesn't care that Jesus' blood is the blood of the innocent), and this evil dilemma involves using the blood of the innocent to gain immortality, where the alternative is freedom, personal responsibility and death, the Christian is the person who chooses to take the path of the evil vampire.

"But Jesus was willing to die", Christians say.

But not really. He BEGGED his father in the Gethsemane gardens for HOURS to take away this catch-22 he was placed in.

What is this catch-22?


If Jesus did not agree to be tortured and die, 'god', (the Head Honcho) was going to send everyone on earth to hell to be tortured and destroyed, but if Jesus DID agree to be tortured and die, at least some people could avoid this torture and instead go to paradise.

Does this make Jesus guilty and part of an "evil system"?

'Hard to say. He could have done like Number 1 in the original pilot of Star Trek, where she set her phaser to over-load where it would explode and destroy everyone, saying "It's wrong to create a race of slaves". Which prompted the bubble-headed alien to say, "we didn't think this possible, your species has a unique hatred of captivity." "You even choose death over captivity". (Which is wrong, of course. This is true of SOME people, but not all, obviously).

In any event, Jesus is the innocent victim and not on trial here. I bring the motives and choices of the Christian into consideration.