STCooper1

Actually, Sherlock became a bad man when he murdered Magnussen as it was unnecessary and undeserved. He was then worse than Magnussen as a traitor and murderer.

Well, then you as a born again Christian do not understand the grace that you received by not being condemned for your sins. Something happened and Sherlock received grace from the punishment. It doesn't erase the fact of what he did, and by sending him on the MI6 mission he was basically being given a death sentence from a country that otherwise cannot practice capitol punishment. But Sherlock passed from death to life through grace. Sherlock made the choice to end the suffering of and protect a lot of people, most especially those in his inner circle. He did what Mycroft couldn't do - and trust me, Mycroft has blood on his hands somewhere, somehow. Although Sherlock isn't a superhero like a Marvel character, he is no less fictional. He may seem more realistic and live in a more realistic world, but he's completely fictional. How many innocent people died in MAN OF STEEL due to all the destruction caused by Superman? What's the difference between pulling a trigger on an unarmed man and being so destructive that thousands of innocents are killed? Or have they actually been murdered by Superman's actions? After all, Superman willingly caused that destruction. And yet we say Superman does the right thing for Truth, Justice and the American way. He remains a hero. Sherlock shoots one baddie and he deserves no mercy or grace? We can't really make a judgement on Sherlock as we don't know his heart, but we do know he understood what he did and was willingly facing his punishment - which also was a form of grace, I suspect. I doubt Magnussen's death was linked to Sherlock in the press. It was likely swept under the rug to avoid the embarrassment and shame over someone who I read in a fan fiction was referred to as a "national treasure." It was fitting. Was he repentant? Does he feel any remorse? These answers have yet to be revealed but undoubtedly will be in S4. Wrong, I understand the free gift of salvation perfectly, and I also understand that the Bible says that the laws of man are to be OBEYED unless they obviously contradict what God says. Sherlock DELIBERATELY did the opposite and committed high treason and murder, thus disobeying the laws of man, all because of his hate of a man that wasn't actually dangerous. He did nothing deserving of a pardon. Our not being worthy of God's grace and salvation has nothing to do with Sherlock's getting away scot-free for murder and treason just because the man he murdered and was trying to trap by committing treason was detestable. Setting aside superheros and especially Man of Steel since that was just stupid, Sherlock doesn't deserve grace for doing the opposite of God's Will, even if he doesn't believe in Him. Also, he WASN'T actually protecting anyone by murdering Magnussen as he wasn't a threat to anyone's life, just their reputation. Do you think that God would just let him get away with those crimes? No, he wouldn't. Would he forgive them? Certainly, as there is only one sin that is unforgivable and thats blasphemy to the Holy Spirit. Trying to compare the two is invalid as they are two entirely different things as one is actual, undeserved mercy and grace given by a perfect being out of love of man, while the other is a mockery of actual justice and a violation of the laws of both God and man. People have done the things that Sherlock did for probably some of the same or similar reasons, and gone to prison for the rest of their lives. So should Sherlock. Even if he thought he was protecting his loved ones, he was doing so in a very evil and flawed way that was very much the opposite of what God did by giving us grace and what had to be done to make it possible. Everything he did was necessary, however horrible it may have seemed to send His own Son to die as a sacrifice for us once and for all time, as there was LITERALLY no other way at that point given what he'd given as prophecy in the Old Testament. What Sherlock did wasn't necessary as nobody was in any danger and the murder did nothing to end the threat of Magnussen's blackmail with his hard copies still out there and there still being others that knew their location.

Wrong, Mary was going to murder Magnussen because he knew the truth about her and she could go to prison for the rest of her life, which she openly admitted to in the episode, and she had NO way of knowing Magnussen put John in the bondfire.

Wrong, Magnussen was not blackmailing Mary and she was going to murder him just because he knew the truth about her. Completely psychotic and unnecessary.

You missed it, I see. After his Mind Palace display, Magnussen openly says to Watson in reply to his comment about the lack of evidence saying "Well, sometimes I send out for something if I really need it, but mostly I just remember it all". He showed evidence this claim was true earlier in the episode when he showed Holmes and Watson the letters from Lord Smallwood to that girl. That reply line confirms the blackmail knowledge in his Mind Palace is still in his possession and safely stored away somewhere else than Appledore where he can send for through trusted underlings should he need anything. Therefore, if he were to be sued for libel or slander, hes got all the proof he'll ever need to win.

A born-again Christian is someone has been saved from Hell by accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior and the free gift of salvation. Out of the religions you have just named, anyone who has done this is a born-again Christian. Anyone(in a religion or not) who does not, regardless of their religion, isn't going to Heaven as only the redeemed of God and the unaware(meaning people unable tom understand their nature of sin because of being too young or because of a mental handicap preventing them from doing so) can dwell with him for all eternity. As to which of those religions I am a part, its Baptist. I'm Missionary Baptist.

Thank you for your answer. That does indeed help me to understand where you are coming from. I actually agree with you ... in principle; two wrongs do not make a right. Not because I am a practising Christian (far from it! ) but because I believe in what might be called a universal moral code (and no, gang, I will not debate what that means! :D ) I'm as unhappy as anyone with the writers' decision to have Sherlock kill Magnussen. The thing is, though, I also understand why others defend that decision; whether because it's smart scriptwriting, or because Sherlock is meant somehow to be above the law, or because fiction is not real life; etc. I don't AGREE; but that's my personal opinion. It doesn't make me right and everyone else wrong. However, I do love sfmpco's invocation of "grace", and that is what I like to believe happened at the end of HLV; not that Sherlock got away with murder, but that he received grace and mercy. “Grace is what God gives us when we don't deserve and mercy is when God doesn't give us what we do deserve.” Nor do I think Sherlock was entirely undeserving; he did what he did out of love for his friends and country (or so I believe). That's worth something, in my book. At any rate, that's how I live with how the story unfolded; my belief that grace is greater than vengeance. Well we differ in regards to grace. I don't think Sherlock deserves it and that to give it to him would mean that he got away with high treason and murder with no repercussions. He DESERVES to be punished for his crimes in my book.

:applause: Thank you for that. Also thanks for proving that there are in fact religious people in the world who are capable of seeing things from a different perspective (I did know this before, being an unbaptised agnostic married to a devout Christian, but it's just good to be reminded that his kind are more numerous than I tend to think). I particularly like the superhero parallel. I think it's funny how superheroes kill villains by the score and cause huge collateral damage and nobody gives a hoot, but Sherlock takes down one bad guy and there's outrage. It's a sign of how high the quality of the show is, of course. Sherlock is just more realistic than Avengers or Fantastic Four or Superman or whatever, so we come to it with more realistic expectations of right and wrong. And I love how the episode itself presented the killing of Magnussen as problematic. Sherlock just isn't a good character. Like he said himself, he may be on the side of the angels, but he's not one of them. He doesn't want to be made into a hero, and he told Moriarty that if he wanted to shake hands with him in hell, he would not disappoint him. We the audience for the most part seem to share Lestrade's hope that some day, Sherlock will be good as well as great, but I don't see Sherlock being in on that plan. We'll see. For the time being, we have to be content that we're rooting for a dangerous, unpredictable and in a lot of ways unscrupulous man. Well, superheroes usually kill villains in a fair fight where they have to to stop them, and while usually trying to prevent any lives being lost. If it happens anyway, its not usually their fault it did. With Sherlock, it was the opposite. Murdering Magnussen was completely unnecessary, unfair(since was unarmed and defenseless), and immoral since he took an actual life that can't be replaced. Something far worse than anything Magnussen ever did. So that deserves outrage.

Well, I am a born-again Christian too and there's at least one other on this forum. That being said, we are dealing with a character who DOESN'T believe in God, who has extraordinary powers of observation, and who lives in a fictional world and who often operates above the laws of the land. I expect Mycroft and Magnussen didn't believe in God either, and I don't impose Christian values on non-Christian characters. It doesn't work. Again, it's fiction. It's not the real world. Let's not forget the O.J. Simpson got off a murder charge when he was completely, totally guilty. Justice doesn't always prevail regardless. You try to preach the Gospel to Sherlock, try to point out the fallacy of evolution vs. creative design by an almighty God, and Sherlock will bury you under your own theology and leave you puppy-whipped in the corner. No one gives a fig when thousands of people are likely killed by The Avengers smashing through buildings and sending rubble, glass and debris everywhere. Leave it in the fictional world. Let the laws of fiction stay fiction. And yes, Magnussen was a blackmailer. ----- I should also add that I am not saying that Sherlock should not be punished, but there is also such a thing as grace, and it's called a pardon, and he may very well have been pardoned in those 4 minutes. Nice to meet another born-again Christian here! Its a pleasure! But no, Magnussen was shown to actually be a blackmailer, not legally speaking. He was just called one. Legally, to be a blackmailer you have to make threats and demands that something be met or else you'll expose this information. Magnussen didn't do that, from what we see in the episode. He makes deals yes, but how they come about is unknown. Could be through meeting like the one at Baker Street where his "victims" call on someone for help arranging them. Although he may be pardoned and amnesty does exist, I don't Sherlock is deserving of it. He deserves punishment.

May I ask you a question? Legality aside, do you think it was "moral" of Magnussen to use people's flaws and weaknesses to control them? If not ... if he was technically within the law, but behaving either immorally or amorally ... would it be appropriate for him to receive ANY kind of punishment, from anyone? Or is punishment acceptable only for those who have broken the law? I hadn't really thought about it that way before, so I'm just curious what you think. No, it wasn't moral of Magnussen to use people's flaws and weaknesses to control them, it was very sinful. He wasn't breaking the law by doing it, however, since he wasn't truly a blackmailer. I think he deserved to be punished legally for the abduction of John by man if they can prove it by being put in prison, and for his other, technically legal, sins by God as divine judgement. However, he didn't deserve to be murdered since he'd never killed anybody or even had anyone killed that we see, and his abduction of John, whose life was in NO danger, doesn't warrant a death sentence. Overall, as a born-again Christian, my point of view is that if you can punish him LEGALLY then do it, but if you can't leave his punishment to God. "Vengeance is mine. I shall repay", says the Lord. As to other forms of punishment as retaliation, such as what Mary did when she knocked him out, I'm also against that as two wrongs don't make a right. I know you may not agree with my point of view and that many don't, however, that is my take on it and I hope you understand where I'm coming from. Yes, Magnussen deserved to be punished for his actions, but in a legal, sinless way only, and not through some illegal, immoral way even worse than him such as murder.

Saved from being bullied? Yeah, thats a worthy cause for murder....not!

Morally and legally speaking, those questions can be answered. No, Magnussen's murder wasn't justice since he didn't deserve to die and murdering him was even worse than what he'd done. Sherlock being sent into exile initially for treason and murder was justice since he indeed deserved to be punished for the crimes he'd committed, but calling him back in four minutes was an absolute mockery of justice.

Magnussen's file on Sherlock shows that he was/is MI6. When Mycroft said "MI6. They want to place you back into Eastern Europe" means that MI6 had placed him there before (probably the 2 years of dismantling Moriarty's network). So he IS MI6. For him to be a spy is part of original canon. I don't know why people balk at the MI6 thing. No one is trying to make him into James Bond. His committing murder and high treason (if it really was high treason and not just part of a set-up with Mycroft to nail Magnussen) are, as you stated, completely wrong and illegal. I do believe Magnussen's guards were not so stupid as not to do their jobs. But even Magnussen says "It's fine. They're harmless!" So he probably didn't have them searched. Fatal mistake. Incorrect, the guards were stupid as he put them out there for that reason. He hired them to do a job and they'd been with him a while, so Magnussen shouldn't have to tell them constantly to do their jobs and search the guests for weapons. They should have known to and did it, but they forgot and their boss wound up dead. The fact that he dismissed them after they brought in Holmes and Watson to him and later said " Its fine. They're harmless" proves he thought they were unarmed and that his guards had done the job he paid them for. Also, Magnussen's file on Holmes said nothing about him being MI6 and Mycroft's statement "back into Eastern Europe" doesn't mean he was an agent necessarily. It could have been just a passing reference to the fact Sherlock was there before as much as a statement that hes MI6 and that they had put him there. Its not expressly confirmed either way. You need to look at Magnussen's read out on Sherlock again because it very specifically shows MI6. Also, the guards would have searched them. That was their job. Why didn't they? I don't think they forgot. Did they forget when they went to Sherlock's flat? No. Why would they ever "forget" at Magnussen's place? They aren't stupid. That's what they are paid to do. Why didn't they? It's all speculation but Magnussen clearly didn't suspect or feel any threat from them. And yes, MI6 had placed him in Eastern Europe before. No, Magnussen's read-out didn't say that Sherlock was MI6, but that his brother Mycroft was instead. So, no its not expressly confirmed in the episode that Sherlock either was or wasn't MI6. Yes they did forget, and those two at Appledore weren't among that were with Magnussen at Baker Street. They were two other, completely different guards, and though they may not have been completely stupid, they had a stupid moment when they forgot to do their jobs at Appledore as they'd been paid. Magnussen didn't have to tell them to do their job since they already knew to do it. Why would they forget then? Plot convenience. As an adaptation of Milverton, Magnussen was always going to die since hes too much to be defeated by Sherlock Holmes. Thats why they forgot. Predictable and cheap, yet simple.

Magnussen's file on Sherlock shows that he was/is MI6. When Mycroft said "MI6. They want to place you back into Eastern Europe" means that MI6 had placed him there before (probably the 2 years of dismantling Moriarty's network). So he IS MI6. For him to be a spy is part of original canon. I don't know why people balk at the MI6 thing. No one is trying to make him into James Bond. His committing murder and high treason (if it really was high treason and not just part of a set-up with Mycroft to nail Magnussen) are, as you stated, completely wrong and illegal. I do believe Magnussen's guards were not so stupid as not to do their jobs. But even Magnussen says "It's fine. They're harmless!" So he probably didn't have them searched. Fatal mistake. Incorrect, the guards were stupid as he put them out there for that reason. He hired them to do a job and they'd been with him a while, so Magnussen shouldn't have to tell them constantly to do their jobs and search the guests for weapons. They should have known to and did it, but they forgot and their boss wound up dead. The fact that he dismissed them after they brought in Holmes and Watson to him and later said " Its fine. They're harmless" proves he thought they were unarmed and that his guards had done the job he paid them for. Also, Magnussen's file on Holmes said nothing about him being MI6 and Mycroft's statement "back into Eastern Europe" doesn't mean he was an agent necessarily. It could have been just a passing reference to the fact Sherlock was there before as much as a statement that hes MI6 and that they had put him there. Its not expressly confirmed either way.

Magnussen wasn't blackmailing Lady Smallwood since all he did was make blunt statements that he owned her. Thats arrogance, not blackmail as blackmail is, legally speaking, to threaten to expose embarrassing or incriminating information on someone unless they meet a demand. He didn't make a threat or a demand to or about Smallwood, and Magnussen was therefore not legally a blackmailer. Wrong, What Mycroft said to Sherlock while they were smoking was "I have a job offer which I would like you to decline" and next he said "MI6. They want to place you back into Eastern Europe." He didn't say Sherlock had worked for MI6 before, but that they had a job offer for him. Mary was John's weakness, therefore he needed her to own her husband. Thats the spectrum Magnussen revealed; by owning Mary through his knowledge of her past, he owns her, by owning her he owns John, by owning John he owns Sherlock, and by owning Sherlock he owns Mycroft, and therefore the entire British government. He NEEDS Mary for it to be possible because Watson cares more about her than Holmes or anyone or thing else. it wasn't just a boring job for MI6 that Sherlock was sent to do. He was punished in the most dishonorable way possible as his own brother exiled him for high treason and murder, and sent him own a suicide mission that he said earlier would prove fatal in about 6 months. Then they made a joke of justice by calling him back in 4 minutes when Moriarty's face pops up everywhere in the country.