Today I will do something completely different. I will write a legal report and I will show that God committed Homicide (or specifically Genocide) within chapter 7 of the book of Genesis. Theoretically one could also test whether it wouldn’t even qualify as murder but murder is a complicated crime which requires many qualifications and I only learn it in my next semester. In case you wanna read along Here is the relevant chapter. I will try and hopefully succeed in showing that God is guilty of committing homicide according to §212 StGB (Strafgesetzbuch) . Therein it basically says that anyone who kills another human without having met the legal criteria of murder will face imprisonment for at least 5 years. In some cases one might also be looking towards life imprisonment. So I guess it would be urgent for God that we find out if he‘s in fact guilty or not. Be forewarned: The language I’ll be using will be kinda strange. That’s how legal reports typically are.
Therefore I give to you my assessment:
By Flooding the planet, God could have made himself guilty of commiting homicide in accordance with §212 StGB.
I elements of the offence
For God to be guilty of homicide he must’ve realized each element of the offence. This includes the phyiscal as well as the subjective elements.
1 Physical elements of the offence
For him to be guilty of homicide God must’ve realized each of the physical elements of the offence
God must’ve commited an action. God flooding the Earth does constitute an action.
b) Success of the offence
God must’ve completed his offence successfully. After the Flood a number of humans were dead. His offence was succesful.
God’s actions must’ve been causal for the success of the offence. An action is causal, if imagining that the action didn’t happen would lead the success of the offence not being realized. If we are to imagine that God didn’t flood the planet, the humans would not have been killed. Therefore the Flood was causal for their death.
d) Objective Attribution
The success of the offence must be objectively attributable to God. The success of the offence is attributable to someone, if he created a danger which is legally disapproved of and if that exact danger was realized in the success of the offence. By Flooding the planet God created the danger of humans being drowned which constitutes a legally disapproved danger and this exact danger was then realized when the humans drowned to death.
e) intermediate results
God realized each of the physical elements of the offence.
2. mental elements of the offence
Furthermore God must’ve had intent concerning each of the elements of the offence. Intend is the knowledge as well as the will of realizing each element of the offence according to §15 .
a) dolus directus of the first degree
God could’ve had intent in form of the dolus directus of the first degree. This would require him that he both knew of the concrete and immediate danger of the realization of the elements of the offence and that he had the will to realize them because realizing them was the goal of his actions. It could however be problematic that he had intent concerning an entire group of people rather than just one individual. This could ba a case of the dolus cumulativus which means that he wanted to commit multiple offences or multiple successes of one offence simultaneously. In the present case God wanted to kill multiple people simultaneously and he knew that sending a Flood would be a danger to the lives of humans and it was his chosen goal that this danger would be realized. Therefore God killed the humans intentionally.
b) intermediate results:
God realized both all physical elements of the offence as well the subjective ones.
God’s actions must’ve been illegal. In general the elements of the offence indicate its illegality, unless there is a relevant justifying reason for his actions.
1. Defence of another person
It could be the case that God defended another person in accordance with §32 passage 2 alternative 2 .
a) Emergency situation
There must’ve been a presently occuring illegal attack on somebody else’s protected rights.
There must’ve been an attack. An attack is every threat caused by a human towards another person’s protected rights. According to Genesis 6 there was violence in the world. This in principal constitutes an attack on the integrity of the human body. It is however unclear whose rights God protected. In the present case his actions constitute a protection of humans who were the victims of violence in general.
bb) presently occuring
An attack is presently occuring if it is either imminent, happening at the moment or still persisting. In the case of Genesis 6 the attack was presently occuring.
The attack must also have been illegal. This is the case if the attacker has justifying reasons for his attack so that he has a right to intervene. There is no indication whatsoever that the attackers had justifying reasons for their actions.
b) emergency action
God must’ve also taken an action during the emergency. This action must’ve gone directly against the protected rights of the attacker. This was indeed the case.
The action must’ve been necessary to protect the rights of another person. An action is necessary if it is both adequate and the mildest medium to end the attack immediately and definitively. An action is adequate if it is capable to end the attack. the mildest medium is the one which among other equally adequate mediums, spares the protected rights of the attacker most effectively. Presently killing the violent humans constitutes an adequate medium to end the attack. However God could’ve sent the violent people a sign or have forewarned them off a possible coming attack or he could’ve stopped the violence by prohibiting the humans from hurting others. Therefore God didn’t use the mildest medium and therefore his action was not necessary.
Therefore God’s actions were illegal
God also must’ve been blameworthy. This is the case in Genesis 7 since God was not in error about his actions nor can he be exculpated for his actions according to §35 StGB since as is already established his actions were not necessary to stop the situation.
Result: God is guilty of commiting homicide in accordance with §212 StGB
There you have it. God is a criminal.
Goodbye from yours truly,
Rene von Boenninghausen @Renevelation
One thought on “Noah‘s Flood: A legal report”
Reblogged this on Apetivist.