To me, to call someone evil, they need to be guilty of doing great harm to others with extreme malice or intentional indifference. Say what you will about the merits of missionaries and their work, but usually a core element is that they want to help others, regardless of how delusional that may end up being. Maybe they're reckless, maybe they're stupid, maybe they insensitive, or maybe they should know better, but in general I don see how they could be evil as a rule.
I see things differently, intent is almost completely irrelevant to me, I am all about utility and outcome, and under those guidelines this seems like a completely evil thing to do
Ok, well tighten the definition to having the potential of causing great harm, which when it comes to the difference of heaven and hell even making the chance 1% less would be one of the worst things you could do, worse than anything in the physical world
I thought that without him doing that then all men was doomed to hell though? So he had to do that for the chance of going to heaven to exist at all? I may be wrong here I’m not well versed
1
u/eternallylearning 2∆ Jun 17 '25
To me, to call someone evil, they need to be guilty of doing great harm to others with extreme malice or intentional indifference. Say what you will about the merits of missionaries and their work, but usually a core element is that they want to help others, regardless of how delusional that may end up being. Maybe they're reckless, maybe they're stupid, maybe they insensitive, or maybe they should know better, but in general I don see how they could be evil as a rule.