PDA

View Full Version : Death Penalty And The Bible



dotcom
March 5th, 2004, 08:42 AM
Arguments have been raised that the death penalty is an act of barbarism, uncivilised and not goldly. What is more humane, to lock up a criminal for life without parole or to shorten this misery?And what does the Bible say about the death penalty?

http://bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Topical.show/RTD/cgg/ID/162

servent101
March 10th, 2004, 03:41 PM
I would clarify that a little - What does the Bible say about that three thousand years ago in the culture at the time - and what was the effect of that on the people then, and what is the effect of capital punishment on the people today?

It is not right to pick out what God said two or three thousand years ago in a completely different culture, time, economic, social and human developmental period and try to apply that based on that it is in the Bible - as a justification for action today - sorry but in today's culture we have to look at things from a reasonable and logical perspective.

If you notice I did not say yes or no to the death penalty - I do have strong reasons against the death penalty - mainly that it is not a deterrent - and the more society kills people - the more people in society will see killing people as a means to gain vengeance or justice in their personal lives. This is the reality today - capital punishment only makes more people take to killing people.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

Aussie Thinker
March 10th, 2004, 07:09 PM
WOW..

Nicely put servent...

I am opposed to the Death Penalty.. It just "feels" wrong anyway..

But I never considered the overall effect of "it is ok to kill" it might have on society !

adajos
March 10th, 2004, 09:03 PM
Servant101 and Aussie:


If you notice I did not say yes or no to the death penalty - I do have strong reasons against the death penalty - mainly that it is not a deterrent - and the more society kills people - the more people in society will see killing people as a means to gain vengeance or justice in their personal lives. This is the reality today - capital punishment only makes more people take to killing people.

I am sorry, but I believe you are very mistaken with this point.

If the death penalty teaches people that it is ok to kill, then does imprisoning criminals teach people that it's ok to hold people against their will? Of course not.

Having convicted murderers put to death does not teach people that murder is acceptible.

Aussie Thinker
March 10th, 2004, 10:29 PM
Adajos,

Well I have no stats on the matter but it does seem a fair assumption that a society that institutionalises Death as a means of punishment is sending a message to all that Death is a legitimate means of redress ?

It is hard to quantify but the constant overt message that killing for punishment is OK would surely make some inroads on peoples psyche ?

Grutch
March 10th, 2004, 10:44 PM
Romans 13


Submission to the Authorities

1 Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.
4 For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience.
6 This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing.
7 Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.



I fully advocate the Death Penalty.

The Death Penalty as it currently stands is not a deterrent for many reasons. The timely appeals process keeps the criminal away from execution for many years. When he finally pays his price for justice, the execution is usually painless and quick.

We as a country spend an extraordinary ammount of money to house, feed, and clothe violent criminals. Not to mention all the extra ammenties they are granted, conjugal visits, cable tv, etc.

It's no suprise criminals don't fear the "Justice System".

A man or woman convicted of Murder should be Immediately transported to an execution chamber where he or she is hung, beheaded, or shot to death in a violent and painful manner. I assure you, this would certainly be a deterrant.

Deterrence really isnt the issue anyway. The true reason one should embrace the death penalty is that Justice is applied.

While we are on the topic of crime I should also note that I advocate public corporal punishment.

I believe certain minor crimes should be punishable by the caning or lashing. Imagine the Enron Executives getting the lash for their scandalous behaviour? The shame they would face publicly would be an example for society to recall.

This treatment could be applied to con artists, vandals, and drug traffickers.

I find it amazing that we call ourselves a more humane society as our government refuses to take the responsibility of Justice more seriously. The system today is laden with back door deals and money exchanges, its purpose is to line pockets and power positioning rather than dealing with criminal justice.

Prisons are Criminal training camps where the inmates are hardened and released back into society to rape our daughters and kill our brothers.

In recent news last November a young woman was accosted, raped and murdered by a released criminal. The law defended his "right" to remain silent as the police sought a resolution on the case.

This is one example out of hundreds of thousands of cases alone in this country which are the result of the "Soft on Crime" philosophy you express. You should be ashamed of yourself.

-Grutch

Cyrus of Persia
March 11th, 2004, 09:28 AM
Seeing that death penalty is not always act of justice, but the act of uttermost injustice (when people die because they are labbeled as murderers even without enough evidence, or in some years later they are found to be innocent), IMO the rule should be - no death penalty.

BUT this rule should apply exceptions to those who enjoy their murders and rapings (and there are some people who do it and admit it openly). Why i want those people better to be dead?

1. They got mental sickness and i dont find much hope that they can be cured.

2. The relatives of such mass-murderers should contribute the costs what it takes for such sick people to live in prison. So what is the better Justice: to kill them, or that their victims must support with their taxes their offenders?

3. In case if such mass-murderer, or mass-raper manages to escape from the prison what is better: that he gets the chance to rape and kill the innocent people again, or the root of the evil will be annihilated by death penalty?
3.

Turbo
March 11th, 2004, 09:38 AM
Excellent post, Grutch. :up: :up: I'd like to see your posts more often.

A couple of minor points:
Originally posted by Grutch

A man or woman convicted of Murder should be Immediately transported to an execution chamber where he or she is hung, beheaded, or shot to death in a violent and painful manner. I assure you, this would certainly be a deterrant. Do you advocate public execution? It's hard to tell from what you've written here. I suppose that word "chamber" made me think "private." But then later in your post you mention that you advocate public corporal punishment.


Deterrence really isnt the issue anyway. The true reason one should embrace the death penalty is that Justice is applied. I think that's an overstatement. The Bible teaches both, really.

And the judges shall make careful inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother; so you shall put away the evil from among you. And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. Deuteronomy 19:18-21

Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil. Ecclesiastes 8:11

cattyfan
March 11th, 2004, 10:08 AM
I support the death penalty in cases where there is no doubt: Ted Bundy would be an excellent example. He escaped from jail twice, and each time returned to his killing spree. He was finally caught in Florida. His final victim was 12 year old Kimberly Leach, whose battered body he buried under a hog shed. There was no doubt he was guilty, but it took years to finally put him to death, during which time he was able to marry and father a daughter.

I would submit Ray Lee Stewart, who also escaped from prison. He was convicted for a spree killing in which he killed 6 people (at several Radio Shaks and a gas station) in the space of several hours. He was, without a doubt, the killer.

John Wayne Gacy...death penalty could not have been applied to a more deserving guy.

I could go on, but I'm sure you get the idea. There are plenty of cases where there is no doubt who committed the crimes, and these criminals are more than deserving of the death penalty. They are sociopaths, who, by the very definition of the word, know right from wrong AND SIMPLY DON'T CARE. The only thing they value is themselves...their own lives. By taking that from them, you have taken the only thing they think is important. Trapping them in a cell for decades allows them to continue to manipulate people and play head games. (Do some research about Gacy's time in prison while he awaited execution. He continued almost the same behavior as he did on the outside.)

I think it's abhorrent we live in a country where rapists, pedophiles, and murderers do less time in prison than people with minor drug convictions.

And I agree with Grutch and the insightful post above.

Grutch
March 11th, 2004, 12:32 PM
I don't have a problem with executions being made public. My only worry are those who have a morbid attraction towards a spectacle like this. On the other hand, a public reminder of the rapist dancing his last jig at the end of a rope might scare many people straight.

Corporeal punishment should absolutely be a public act. The pain is one lesson to your crime, but public humiliation in my opinion is an even better teacher.

As for the injustice of the "Justice System" of course there are cases of those implicated and convicted who are innocent....


3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.

I think that in many cases, folk who have a past with a run in with authority are accused of crimes they didn't commit. Keep a clean slate in your life and you may avoid this.

I have frequently visited Brazil for business and personal reasons and have seen the ultimate result of a nation "soft on crime". Brazillians have no respect for the law and it shows by the horribly high crime rate. Some may suggest that the high poverty rate in the country contributes to this, which I could agree with in part. But the country suffers from an epidemic of crime that permeates every neighborhood in the country.

You literally have to be on guard as you approach your car from the home you were just visiting. People live in constant fear of being robbed or mugged or killed for your shoes, which ammounts to terrorism in my view. In cases of self defense, the state incriminates the victom rather than the assailant commiting a crime.

Being soft on crime leads to situations like this.

-Grutch

adajos
March 11th, 2004, 01:03 PM
Aussie,


Well I have no stats on the matter but it does seem a fair assumption that a society that institutionalises Death as a means of punishment is sending a message to all that Death is a legitimate means of redress ?

It is hard to quantify but the constant overt message that killing for punishment is OK would surely make some inroads on peoples psyche ?

It's one thing for something to make sense in your mind versus making sense in reality. If you are correct, shouldn't we also expect that society's imprisonment of criminals teach people that it's ok to hold them against their will, so it's teaching that kidnapping the guilty is ok?

Aussie Thinker
March 11th, 2004, 03:59 PM
Grutch,

Have you dealt much with the legal system ?

How often do you think it gets things right ? *

Even with the Death Penalty situation like it is innocent people STILL go to their death.

Your system will pile up the innocents in droves.

Something in me agrees in part with Cattyfan.. I can see very little reason to keep criminally insane and mass murderers alive except maybe to study them and find out how to prevent these sort of psychos from harming society.

* I recently saw a case where 9 Buddhist monks were murdered in New Mexico (I think). A mentally disturbed guy claimed he was one of the perpetrators and gave the police some info only they knew… he claimed he had 3 accomplices.

The police KNEW he was right because of the info he had. They grilled and grilled the accomplices of which 2 of them eventually confessed. The 3rd never did and was later released due to lack of evidence.

Under your system these guys would have been brutally executed.

Later other evidence turned up that showed they had not committed the crime and it was 2 unrelated individuals who had.

Adajos,

Fair point (about the kidnapping) but killing is a final solution.. where does kidnapping leave you as a means of individual punishment or retribution ?

servent101
March 11th, 2004, 04:28 PM
In our society people need to respect life - There are two ways to try - one is insane - if you kill someone you will be killed - this does not teach people respect for life - and States in America that try this only end up with more people killing more people - It is statistically proven that when the death penalty is introduced - the number of people killing people goes up -

So what is the second way to try to get people to respect life - Humanely treat a murderer - in jail - let them live out their life behind bars in a humane way - this teaches us that we respect the right of all people to life - and when someone in our society is hurt by another - so angry that they want to kill him or her - they have this example to stop them from killing someone - that we as a people have decieded to respect the life of everyone - no matter how henus of a crime they commited.

The death penalty is simply not a deterant. Most Americans do not want the death penalty.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

Grutch
March 11th, 2004, 04:46 PM
Aussie Thinker,

The criminal Justice system tends to get more things right than you may think. The cases of abuse, mismanagement, and other failings of the system are highlighted and made front page news by the media.

The millions of criminal cases that are successfully prosecuted go unreported. Of course you can access the cases publicly and see for youself.

I don't see your point in explaining one case of bad detective work. I agree that the system has its flaws but the system today as it stands is doing nothing to better protect society. I don't buy the argument that "Hey 1% off people locked up are innocent! This is why I disagree with the death penalty!".

We as a society shouldn't be obligated to pay tax dollars for the welfare of jailed criminals. If one is deemed unfit for society by his actions (murder, rape, child abuse) he ought to be executed. Lesser Crimes should be dealt with by means of corperal punishment or restitution to the affected party.

-Grutch

Grutch
March 11th, 2004, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by servent101

In our society people need to respect life - There are two ways to try - one is insane - if you kill someone you will be killed - this does not teach people respect for life - and States in America that try this only end up with more people killing more people - It is statistically proven that when the death penalty is introduced - the number of people killing people goes up -

Do you have statistics that prove this? Please produce them since you have made the claim.



So what is the second way to try to get people to respect life - Humanely treat a murderer - in jail - let them live out their life behind bars in a humane way - this teaches us that we respect the right of all people to life - and when someone in our society is hurt by another - so angry that they want to kill him or her - they have this example to stop them from killing someone - that we as a people have decieded to respect the life of everyone - no matter how henus of a crime they commited. ..


We don't let jailed criminals life the rest of their life in a Humane way. We release them back into society where they rape young women and stab them repeatedly with a kitchen knife.

Your psycho babble ideas are what opens the floodgates of injustice on to the common people. You apparantly don't agree with God because it was he who called for the criminal's Just punishment. ... be back later to give you scriptural verses backing up my statement.

-Grutch

Aussie Thinker
March 11th, 2004, 07:36 PM
Grutch,

In the case I highlighted you would have had 2 men brutally executed for nothing.

Should the people who executed them then be executed also for murder ?

You are BADLY estimating the ability of humans ability to handle wanton death penalties for the crimes you mentioned. Who gets this ultimate power ?.. people always abuse these sort of systems.. to get rid of the people they don’t want etc.

Some people in your society would start to get the power over life and death and power like this corrupts terribly.

Your society would be a hell hole police state in 10 years.

Grutch
March 11th, 2004, 07:52 PM
Aussie Thinker-

I agreed with you that there are flaws in the system and it is imperfect. But more innocents are murdered, raped, molested, and robbed today because modern society has decided to protect the guilty over the innocent.

As I stated before the percentage of those in jail who are innocent are a very scant handful and usually have prior offenses. You obviously have been taken up with crime fiction and media hysteria over the few cases where innocents have been convicted of crimes they didn't commit.

Many countries in the world today are a Hell Hole because the citizens have been stripped of their self defense rights and criminals are not properly dealt with. I've lived in some of these countries and can tell you it's not fun having to look over your shoulder when going to your car or having to pack a weapon to defend myself in case of a robbery. It is the philosophy you promote which has lead to this.

The government already has the power of life and death over you. Proposing Anarchy?

-Grutch

Aussie Thinker
March 11th, 2004, 08:20 PM
Grutch,

I would hate to be one of those “few” innocents who got “horribly” executed to appease some ones idea of revenge.

I live in a country with NO capital punishment and I feel very safe anywhere and everywhere. Safer than I did the couple of times I went to the States (although to be honest I felt pretty safe there too).

The Government does NOT have the power of life and Death over me.. and even in your country where it may.. there are many safeguards etc in place to protect you.. the same safeguards you want to fast track out of existence.

Your system would see powerful individuals with virtually NO safety net deciding who lives and dies.

servent101
March 12th, 2004, 09:59 AM
Gruth


Your psycho babble ideas are what opens the floodgates of injustice on to the common people. You apparantly don't agree with God because it was he who called for the criminal's Just punishment. ... be back later to give you scriptural verses backing up my statement.

You already tried – this is my response -


I would clarify that a little - What does the Bible say about that three thousand years ago in the culture at the time - and what was the effect of that on the people then, and what is the effect of capital punishment on the people today?

It is not right to pick out what God said two or three thousand years ago in a completely different culture, time, economic, social and human developmental period and try to apply that based on that it is in the Bible - as a justification for action today - sorry but in today's culture we have to look at things from a reasonable and logical perspective.


Do you have statistics that prove this? Please produce them since you have made the claim.

The statistics are there – you will have to find them for yourself – as no matter what I post you will still go out and ascertain whatever you want. If you want the truth – you can find it easily enough on your own.


We don't let jailed criminals life the rest of their life in a Humane way. We release them back into society where they rape young women and stab them repeatedly with a kitchen knife.

In a lot of ways you are right – and there needs to be some change in the law – Sexual Preditors almost always repeat their crime – they need to be jailed for life – their entire natural life – but part of the problem in the criminal justice system is that All Criminals are treated like animals – there is very little to no chance that they can be rehabilitated – and the most likely scenario is that they are made worse by their incarceration – the problem is that the jailers are worse criminals that the convicts – and people like you just look in the Bible for all of your reality and are blind to the condition that criminals live under – then when they are let out – people like you just call for vengeance – and crime just gets worse and worse – your only solution is to try to get people to read a book about a culture that has no common denominator to us today – and to get them to have an “orthodox mindset” be blind to what is reality now, just implement the laws of a different time – and do not lean on your own understanding. Well suffer the consequences.

With Christ’s Love

Servent101

servent101
March 12th, 2004, 10:08 AM
Ausie Thinker


Some people in your society would start to get the power over life and death and power like this corrupts terribly.

This is true - and today the President of the USA - G.W. Bush has signed the death penalty to over fifty people. This does something to a person that is very difficult to handle - hopefully the person is able to handle the hardship - but it is a burden on leaders that is not necessary - the death penalty only results in the lessening of the value of human life across the board _)))TODAY(((_ What it was three thousand years ago - has a completely different effect on the people. It does no good for society to kill it's convicts - nor to treat them the way they are once they are incarcerated.

With Christ's Love

Servant101

cattyfan
March 12th, 2004, 10:41 AM
Just as an aside, why were people always sentenced to be "hanged by the neck until dead?" Isn't "hanged by the neck" sufficient, as I doubt they would be "hanged by the neck until very uncomfortable" or "hanged by the neck until you are in pain and mostly dead."

It seems redundant.

dotcom
March 12th, 2004, 11:08 AM
Originally posted by servent101


In our society people need to respect life - There are two ways to try - one is insane - if you kill someone you will be killed - this does not teach people respect for life - and States in America that try this only end up with more people killing more people - It is statistically proven that when the death penalty is introduced - the number of people killing people goes up -

Yes servent101, respect for life. So the murderer is automatically excluded in this " respect" - he just took someone's life!! So in essence you are saying some members of society will respect human life while others will not. So the best punishment and education for those who don't is to show them" respect for life" by locking them up for life. Doesn't that defeat the purpose for your argument?

servent101
March 12th, 2004, 12:58 PM
dotcom


Doesn't that defeat the purpose for your argument?

The purpose of my argument is to present a 'reality' that in tokays culture to stop horrible acts from happening we need to commit to the sacredness of life as a society - and not kill people for the mistakes they make.

I agree that it is better for the criminal to be killed - that this will do more for that particular individual - as long as killing them gets them to repent - which it usually does: but what effect does this capital punishment have on the masses? - I am suggesting that on the masses if we would choose to respect life that there would be less people at large who would murder someone when they were tempted.

With Christ's Love

Servent101

adajos
March 12th, 2004, 02:47 PM
Aussie (and/or Servant101):


Fair point (about the kidnapping) but killing is a final solution.. where does kidnapping leave you as a means of individual punishment or retribution ?

Your question is irrelevant to the issue we were discussing-society imprisoning criminals doesn't seem to teach people that confining against one's will is fine, just as executing murderers does not teach that killing is ok. So the idea that capital punishment shows that murder is ok has now been discredited. So let's not trot that false idea out anymore.

You're shifting to another objection to the death penalty--that is, the possibility of executing an innocent person. I will discuss this objection to the death penalty with you as well.

Answer me this: do you believe that one innocent person killed is one too many, and thus grounds for making the death penalty illegal?

Servant101:


It is statistically proven that when the death penalty is introduced - the number of people killing people goes up -

I'd very much like to see the study that proved this---I highly doubt it.


So what is the second way to try to get people to respect life - Humanely treat a murderer - in jail - let them live out their life behind bars in a humane way - this teaches us that we respect the right of all people to life - and when someone in our society is hurt by another - so angry that they want to kill him or her - they have this example to stop them from killing someone - that we as a people have decieded to respect the life of everyone - no matter how henus of a crime they commited.

You say putting a murderer in prison, rather than killing them, shows that we respect life. I say just the opposite---leaving a murderer alive shows that we do not respect life, because we are giving him opportunity to kill again. Prison guards and other inmates are likely victims. Further, life without parole is seldom that--many prisoners are freed to kill again amongst the general population--and prison escapes are not unheard of either.


The death penalty is simply not a deterant.

Incorrect. At the very least it is a deterant under some circumstances. For example, let's say you committed a crime that carries a penalty of life in prison without parole, and is not a capital crime---perhaps armed robbery. Let's say further, that the many policemen show up during the commission of your crime and you flea justice with your ill-gotten gains. If there is no death penalty in your state of residence, then what good reason could you give for not killing cops in an effort to escape? None--you have already committed armed robbery and will be punished with LWOP, the toughest penalty your state can impose. You actually have a positive incentive to kill cops in such a case.

On the other hand, if you commit that crime in a death penalty state, especially somewhere where they don't hesistate to use it, you will think twice before killing a cop whilst escaping and greatly increasing the penalty for your actions.


Most Americans do not want the death penalty.

Also incorrect. Every poll I've ever heard of says exactly the opposite.

dotcom
March 12th, 2004, 02:57 PM
Originally posted by servent101


...and not kill people for the mistakes they make.

Well, quite a number of states still carry the death penalty. Some criminals escape by declaring insanity or mental retardation. Do you think "mentally retarded" people should get the death penalty?

I agree that it is better for the criminal to be killed - that this will do more for that particular individual - as long as killing them gets them to repent - which it usually does:


...but what effect does this capital punishment have on the masses?

Deterrence. Most murderers would choose to kill for luxurious life sentence in prison than to do it for capital punishment.





I am suggesting that on the masses if we would choose to respect life that there would be less people at large who would murder someone when they were tempted.

Murder has been going on since man was created.
Is there a point where humans will choose to respect life without sin?

bagels & lox
March 26th, 2004, 12:45 PM
The bible is a death penalty.

Grutch
March 26th, 2004, 01:51 PM
I bow to your words of wisdom bagels and lox, please enlighten us some more!

Perhaps I'll help elaborate our most intelligent bagels and lox suggestion by posting the following clip I found from searching the web...

In the time of Noah and the great flood, God spoke and said,

"Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed;" - Genesis 9:6

And at the time when God was giving His law to Moses and His people, He said these things:

"He who strikes a man so that he dies shall surely be put to death." - Exodus 21:12

"And he who strikes his father or his mother shall surely be put to death." - Exodus 21:15

"He who kidnaps a man and sells him, or if he is found in his hand, shall surely be
put to death." Exodus 21:16

"If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman's husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe." - Exodus 21:22-24

"Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death." - Numbers 35:31

"So you shall not pollute the land where you are; for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land, for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it." - Numbers 35:33

God also tells us what happens when there is no swift death penalty for capital crimes:

"Because the sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil." - Ecclesiastes 8:11

God shows his anger when He speaks and says,

"And will you profane Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread, killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live, by your lying to My people who listen to lies?" - Ezekiel 13:19

Grutch
March 26th, 2004, 02:01 PM
Many people fear a just society becasue they in their own hearts are evil and are terrified of the thought of being truly punished for the crimes they commit. When justice is not served, people will seek justice by their own hands.

Flogging should be punishment for many crimes commited. It is an effective humiliating deterrant.

Restitution should be paid out the the victims of a crime rather than to the state which immorally squanders it. Can anybody provide an argument as to why we don't do this in our current system?

-Grutch