Speeding

Sigh There is so much I want to say in reply to all of your comments…and I know I only just stepped into the argument…and I know it must seem like I'm backing out because I don't have answers. But I'll be perfectly honest. I'm backing out of the argument, because as I've watched it progress (since it all started), it has made me very frustrated.
Honestly. When I got on today, I -almost- blew up. ^Just ask Nicolas. :P^ And I know that if I decided to stay in the argument, it would get me even more heated.
So for the peace and safety of the forums ^JK^, and for the self-control on my part, I am not going to fully step into this debate, but leave that to others.

All I have left to say is this:

In the verse Aiden posted, the Bible specifically commands us to save lives when we can. But the government commands us not to speed. This is not a sin-trap or even a dilemma. Though it would be wrong to speed under most circumstances, God's commands always come before the governments'. So in the situation we've been discussing, we can either obey God or the government. Take your pick.

I agree with you here regarding God's pre-eminence over the government. I think, though, and please correct me if I am wrong, Rosie and the other completely anti-speeders, that the chief disagreement is probably over to what extent we can say that our actions will change the situation.

Let me explain: We all agree that we ought to try to save a person's life when it is in our power to do so (please, please, please let there be agreement on this!), but we disagree over whether we can disobey the government's commands to achieve this. My position is that the government is fine with it, so it is not a problem, but others would say that God tells us to listen to the authorities, and He will decide whether the person dies anyway. In the meantime, we are to follow his commands to whatever end, leaving all to Him. Others here would argue that, of course God is in control, but we are at the same time responsible for our actions before God. If we think that a man will die in five minutes when the only way to get him to a hospital in that time is to speed, than we have a responsibility not to remain idle. We need to act on the information we have been given and do all in our power to save the life that God seems to have entrusted to us for a short time.

I see the logic in both sides (though I personally believe that it is O.K. to speed to save a life), but I thought it was important to get out the chief difference: to what extent our actions change the situation. Rosie or Nicholas might say that speeding doesn't matter: God has already decided whether he will die. Aidan and OCTSRIS (I think) would say that that does not remove our responsibility to save a life. To follow the speed limit puts an unnecessary obstacle upon that responsibility, and is thus a type of sin.

I hope that helps somewhat. This, at least, is the difference I see between the two positions.

. . .but we disagree over whether we can disobey God's commands to achieve this.

Jimmy, what you said was well put; but there is one significant error in it, which is what I quoted above. We can never disobey God for any reason. What we disagree on is whether we can disobey the government's commands to achieve this. And since–in the verse Aiden posted–God commands us to try to achieve it, and the speed limit prevents that, I believe the answer is yes.

*Sigh* There is so much I want to say in reply to all of your comments...and I know I only just stepped into the argument...and I know it must seem like I'm backing out because I don't have answers. But I'll be perfectly honest. I'm backing out of the argument, because as I've watched it progress (since it all started), it has made me very frustrated. Honestly. When I got on today, I -almost- blew up. ^Just ask Nicolas. :P^ And I know that if I decided to stay in the argument, it would get me even more heated. So for the peace and safety of the forums ^*JK*^, and for the self-control on my part, I am not going to fully step into this debate, but leave that to others.

What is making you heated? Are we being too harsh in our discussion? I would very much be interested in hearing your views. I really am not trying to justify breaking the speed limit, Rosie, I only think that sometimes it may be necessary. I understand if you do not wish to debate, but could you give me the verse(s) that has brought you to the conclusion that we may never break the speed limit? If you will not, that is okay. :) I was only hoping to see where you are coming from as well.

Oops… I see what you are saying. I worded that incorrectly. :)

What Aiden said. (This is so much more efficient than blockquoting. :-) What made you blow up?

I think we can sum this up easy.

We don't play with fire extinguishers for a reason, but "In Case of Emergency, Break Glass".

In the same manner "In Case of Emergency, Speed".

Speeding shouldn't be a habit, but an exception in specific cases.

In those specific cases, your speeding should also be tempered with wisdom. How far are you from where you need to be? Are you fast enough to help, or so fast you could hurt?

Generally, however, the government should be obeyed.

BTW…do paramedics follow the speed limit? 'Cuz to be honest, in an emergency…it doesn't look like it. :P

Good summation!

I agree, Sam, but we need to have Scriptural proof of that. We have given Scriptural proof, but I would not say what you just said without the Scriptural proofs.

I apologize for taking so long to respond.

But what if the person survives only because you broke the speed limit? *The person wouldn't survive _because_ you speed... It God had appointed that day for them to die, they would die whether you sped or not and if God hadn't appointed that day for them to die, they would live whether you sped or not.* Any situation and any outcome is possible in this world, so we could justify anything if we just found the right situation. This is a verse I brought up earlier. Proverbs 24:11-12: If thou forbear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain; If thou sayest, Behold, we knew it not; doth not he that pondereth the heart consider it? and he that keepeth thy soul, doth not he know it? and shall not he render to every man according to his works? Yes, I know that you would not exactly be leaving him to die since he might survive with you following the speed limit. What I think it comes down to is which is more important: obeying civil laws, or saving someone's life. *I don't think that's the question in this situation. There are other times when by following civil laws you'd be forced to break God's laws, in which case I'd wholeheartedly say follow God!!! But in this case I don't believe it would be necessary to break the law to obey God.* Whether or not the person's life is saved, you still must make a decision of which comes first. If it was safe to do so in this situation, I personally would have to either break the speed limit, or my conscience. *One thing I wanted to ask is how can you be 100% sure when it's "safe" to break the speed limit? Going faster gives you less reaction time if something happens and it's not always going to be obvious that it would be dangerous to speed. ^maybe that's too off topic...^*

Emily, I can't quite tell which side you're on; but a few things:

(1) The Bible specifically tells us to save someone's life if we can (I noticed you didn't bold any of the verse), therefore if the speed limit prevents us from doing that, God's laws come before man's laws. We are to obey the government only if their laws don't prevent us, whether intentionally or unintentionally, from breaking God's laws.

(2) This whole argument about speeding not making a difference in God's will is very poor. We all know that God's will is going to happen, but we are still responsible for what we do. And if we put the law of a man over the law of God and it is God's will that a person dies because of that, we are still responsible. If you sped but they still died, you could say with a clean conscience that you did all you could to save them, and their blood would not be laid on you.

(3) "we could justify anything if we just found the right situation." cue buzzer That's a gross twist. If speeding to save someone's life was a sin, then in that situation, you'd be stuck between two sins–either speed or neglect to do all you can to save the person. So no matter what you did, you'd be sinning. There would be no. way. out. =O So you might as well choose the sin that is not going to kill someone. Buuuut–I'm just saying that to remind us of what Proverbs 24:11-12 tells us. And since God's laws come before man's laws, we have already proven 100% from Scripture that it would not be sinful to speed in this situation.

(4) I didn't say you had to drive like a maniac. Go as fast as you safely can. Do still avoid the risk of hurting/killing others.

Any situation and any outcome is possible in this world, so we could justify anything if we just found the right situation.

This is a comment that I made earlier, and perhaps did not explain well enough. At the point when I said this, many potential outcomes were being shared to refute the idea of speeding to save someone's life since they might not survive anyhow, so I stated that if we are judging what is correct by the outcome we will get, then anything can be good to do if we can only see the future. We cannot see the future, and even if we could we should still follow what God says, no matter the outcome.

So all that to say, I was only meaning that the Bible is the only way to prove anything, not the outcome that the situation will have.

^If my meaning is still unclear, just let me know and I will try to clarify it some more. :)^

That makes things clearer, Aidan!

*One thing I wanted to ask is how can you be 100% sure when it's "safe" to break the speed limit? Going faster gives you less reaction time if something happens and it's not always going to be obvious that it would be dangerous to speed. ^maybe that's too off topic...^*

Well, you cannot exactly be sure, but supposing it is four in the morning and there is not a car on the road, you can go fairly fast without having to worry a whole lot about hitting someone. But, sometimes it comes down to which is more risky? Are you likely to hit a car if you speed? Or is the person you are trying to save likely to die if you don't? I think it must be taken on case by case basis as there cannot be a hard and fast rule on how fast you can speed and still be safe.
All that being said, I would not speed unless it is quite necessary to save someone's life. If someone just has a broken leg, I would not speed with them to the hospital, since a couple extra minutes will not make a difference. Speeding should only be used for dire circumstances.

Oh, yeah; yeah!

But what if the person survives only because you broke the speed limit? *The person wouldn't survive _because_ you speed... It God had appointed that day for them to die, they would die whether you sped or not and if God hadn't appointed that day for them to die, they would live whether you sped or not.* Any situation and any outcome is possible in this world, so we could justify anything if we just found the right situation.

I COMPLETELY agree with you! You are right, someone will not necessarily survive because you broke the speed limit. I only made that statement as another response to outcome-based arguments we were receiving, showing them that while their example could happen, mine could too. What happens really has no impact upon your duty. Yes, God is always in control of what happens. What you do or do not do will not change anything since God already has EVERYTHING planned. Nevertheless we must still endeavor to do all that we are commanded to do. We always should draw conclusions from the Bible, not from outcomes and circumstances.

Aidan's example is more likely, too. (It does depend on the condition, but I think it at least happe s more often than not.)

Of course, this plays no role in its morality; but I'm just pointing it out. :-)

Aidan's example is more likely, too. (It does depend on the condition, but I think it at least happe s more often than not.) Of course, this plays no role in its morality; but I'm just pointing it out. :-)

Exactly! Outcomes do not mold our morality; the Bible does.