User Tag List

Page 10 of 63 FirstFirst ... 789101112132060 ... LastLast
Results 136 to 150 of 945

Thread: No Death Penalty. What Is Your Position?

  1. #136
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    26,235
    Thanks
    4,628
    Thanked 10,198 Times in 7,581 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147795
    Quote Originally Posted by quip View Post
    " The authors noted criminals do not consider the consequences of their actions, particularly when the consequence is rarely applied, as in the case of the death penalty. "Much psychological and sociological research suggests that many criminal acts are crimes of passion or committed in a heated moment based only on immediate circumstances, and thus potential offenders may not consider or weigh longer-term possibilities of punishment and capture, including the possibility of capital punishment."

    Source
    Quote Originally Posted by quip View Post
    Abortion has more affect on murder rates (criminal rates in general.)than the d.p.
    Quote Originally Posted by quip View Post
    Interesting observation.

    Even as - via your apt example - the death penalty remains functionally ineffective? Sounds like an emotional, personal crusade to me.
    a trifecta of brilliant posts!

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    quip (May 15th, 2019)

  3. #137
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,830
    Thanks
    604
    Thanked 1,383 Times in 1,079 Posts

    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    293912
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    You state it in the negative but the affirmative holds just as well. That which was morally right then, remains morally right today.

    Therefore...

    The punishment for a moral based crime is just as valid as is the crime itself. If the law against murder would still apply so would it's punishment for the same reason.
    Was it morally right (then) to kill someone for cursing their parents?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  4. #138
    Toxic Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    19,332
    Thanks
    570
    Thanked 13,333 Times in 9,306 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147856
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Was it morally right (then) to kill someone for cursing their parents?
    Read the law. If it was followed, where would the immorality be?

    Or are you one of these guys who thinks they are above the law?
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Stripe For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  6. #139
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    296
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 62 Times in 55 Posts

    Blog Entries
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2868
    Quote Originally Posted by ok doser View Post
    Imprisonment is not of God's Law, and is thus inherently unjust
    Note that imprisonment, keeping legal offenders "in ward" (Leviticus 24:12, Numbers 15:34), was practiced during the time of the Old Covenant Mosaic law.

    Also, Hades is God's "prison" for souls (1 Peter 3:19), even under Jesus Christ's New Covenant law (Matthew 5:22-26, Matthew 18:23-35, Luke 12:58-59).

    Also, the souls of all obedient believers who died during Old Testament times are now part of the Church in heaven (Hebrews 11:13-16, Hebrews 12:22-24). For now there are no believers outside of the Church (Ephesians 4:4-6). And 1 Peter 4:6, 1 Peter 3:18c-19, and Ephesians 4:9 show that there was a post-resurrection descent of Jesus Christ into Hades to preach the fulfillment of the Gospel (of 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) to the souls of the dead imprisoned in Hades, after which preaching, Jesus ascended into heaven with all of the souls of those in Hades who had died in faith (Ephesians 4:8-9, Hebrews 11:13-16, Hebrews 12:22-24).

  7. #140
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    296
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 62 Times in 55 Posts

    Blog Entries
    18
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2868
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    . . . Jesus did not come to abolish the Mosaic law. (Mat. 5:17-19, Mat. 8:4, Mat. 23:2-3, John 7:19-23 and elsewhere.)
    Regarding Matthew 5:17-18, it means that Jesus Christ came the first time not to abolish the prophecies in the Mosaic law and the Old Testament prophets regarding the Messiah's/the Christ's first coming, but to fulfill all those prophecies (Luke 24:44-48; e.g. Acts 3:22-26, Isaiah 53). Matthew 5:17-18 cannot mean that Jesus came not to abolish the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, for He did come to do that, on the Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19). Also, Matthew 5:17-18 cannot mean that Jesus came to fulfill the letter of all of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments, for He could not possibly have done that. For example, some of those commandments applied only to women after childbirth (Leviticus 12:4-8), or to wives suspected of adultery by their husbands (Numbers 5:19-31).

    As the Christ (Matthew 5:17, Luke 24:44-46), the mediator of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-9), Jesus had the divine authority to contradict the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments and replace them with His own, even better, New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 19:7-9, John 8:5-7), such as those He gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of the apostle Paul (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). And as the Christ, Jesus had the divine authority to allow His disciples to break the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Matthew 12:1-8).

  8. #141
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,772
    Thanks
    691
    Thanked 7,105 Times in 3,784 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Was it morally right (then) to kill someone for cursing their parents?
    Is it your intention to suggest that God is unjust?

    First of all, it's not a matter of simply killing people. It's a public, government sanctioned, execution of a convicted capital criminal.

    And yes, of course it was morally right to execute those whom God said should not remain alive.

    Ezekiel 13:19 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,....

    And finally, as I have already explained multiple times (I think to you), this law did not apply to small children or smart mouthed teenagers. This law had to do with adults who were drunkards and went around defaming their parents publicly. Further, there are good arguments to suggest that this law was symbolic and had to do with Israel's relationship with THE Father. This law was paralleled when Israel rejected the risen Messiah. In response God "cut them off" because of their rebellion (Romans 9). I've heard arguments on both sides though and while I do fall on the side that says that this law would not have just application outside of Israel's covenant with God, I wouldn't be dogmatic about it either way when discussing these things theoretically.

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  9. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  10. #142
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,772
    Thanks
    691
    Thanked 7,105 Times in 3,784 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by bibleverse2 View Post
    Regarding Matthew 5:17-18, it means that Jesus Christ came the first time not to abolish the prophecies in the Mosaic law and the Old Testament prophets regarding the Messiah's/the Christ's first coming, but to fulfill all those prophecies (Luke 24:44-48; e.g. Acts 3:22-26, Isaiah 53). Matthew 5:17-18 cannot mean that Jesus came not to abolish the letter of the commandments of the Old Covenant Mosaic law, for He did come to do that, on the Cross (Ephesians 2:15-16, Colossians 2:14-17, Romans 7:6; 2 Corinthians 3:6-18, Hebrews 7:18-19). Also, Matthew 5:17-18 cannot mean that Jesus came to fulfill the letter of all of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments, for He could not possibly have done that. For example, some of those commandments applied only to women after childbirth (Leviticus 12:4-8), or to wives suspected of adultery by their husbands (Numbers 5:19-31).

    As the Christ (Matthew 5:17, Luke 24:44-46), the mediator of the New Covenant (Matthew 26:28, Hebrews 12:24, Hebrews 7:22, Hebrews 8:6-9), Jesus had the divine authority to contradict the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments and replace them with His own, even better, New Covenant commandments (Matthew 5:38-44, Matthew 19:7-9, John 8:5-7), such as those He gave in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:19 to 7:29) and in the epistles of the apostle Paul (1 Corinthians 14:37; 1 Thessalonians 4:2). And as the Christ, Jesus had the divine authority to allow His disciples to break the letter of the Old Covenant Mosaic law's commandments (Matthew 12:1-8).
    No.

    This is almost entirely wrong.

    The only portions of the Mosaic Law that were not applicable too and observed by the Twelve apostles AFTER Calvary and after the Resurrection and after Pentecost (A Jewish feast/sabbath day by the way), were those laws dealing with sacrifices and the priesthood, et. al. (See Hebrews - the whole book). Aside from those things, the Twelve obeyed Moses. They circumcised their children, avoided unclean foods, observed the sabbath, tithed, etc, etc, etc just as Christ did and taught them to do.

    Your confusion has to do with having missed the fact that when Israel officially rejected their risen Messiah, God cut them off and turned instead to the Gentiles through Paul, the singular Apostle to the Body of Christ, who did not receive "his gospel" from man, nor was he taught it but rather it was given to him by direct divine revelation (Galatians 1:12). Without the Pauline epistles, you would live your Christian life much the same way that modern Messianic Jews do (they almost entirely ignore Paul, by the way) and would refuse to work on Saturday's and would avoid unclean foods, etc.

    In short, you read both the Pauline epistles as well as the rest of the New Testament as though it's a collection of letters that were all written to the same group of believers under the same dispensational rules. The result is contradiction and confusion.

    Jesus did not violate the Mosaic Law. Had He done so, He could not have died for the sins of the world because He'd have had His own sin debt to pay! (i.e. Your doctrine puts the whole of the Christian faith in jeopardy.)

    Further, the Mosaic Law cannot be improved upon with "even better" commandments in the first place (Galatians 3:21). Jesus flat out did not improve the law, He crucified it, removed it out of the way (Colossians 2:14).

    Clete

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  11. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  12. #143
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    26,235
    Thanks
    4,628
    Thanked 10,198 Times in 7,581 Posts

    Mentioned
    40 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147795
    Quote Originally Posted by bibleverse2 View Post
    Note that imprisonment, keeping legal offenders "in ward" (Leviticus 24:12, Numbers 15:34), was practiced during the time of the Old Covenant Mosaic law.
    not as a punishment

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  14. #144
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,830
    Thanks
    604
    Thanked 1,383 Times in 1,079 Posts

    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    293912
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    Is it your intention to suggest that God is unjust?
    No!


    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    And yes, of course it was morally right to execute those whom God said should not remain alive.
    Ok. So then, let's apply your previous statement to this one.

    Earlier, you said:
    That which was morally right then, remains morally right today.
    You say it was morally right to execute people for cursing their parents, in the OT. Therefore it is morally right today to execute people for cursing their parents. Yes?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  15. #145
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,830
    Thanks
    604
    Thanked 1,383 Times in 1,079 Posts

    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    293912
    Quote Originally Posted by Stripe View Post
    Read the law. If it was followed, where would the immorality be?

    Or are you one of these guys who thinks they are above the law?
    Then is it morally right today to execute people for cursing their parents?
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  16. #146
    Toxic Adaptive Ninja Turtle Stripe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    19,332
    Thanks
    570
    Thanked 13,333 Times in 9,306 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)


    Rep Power
    2147856
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    Then is it morally right today to execute people for cursing their parents?
    Read the law.
    Where is the evidence for a global flood?
    E≈mc2
    "the best maths don't need no stinkin' numbers"

    "The waters under the 'expanse' were under the crust."
    -Bob B.

  17. #147
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,772
    Thanks
    691
    Thanked 7,105 Times in 3,784 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    No!




    Ok. So then, let's apply your previous statement to this one.

    Earlier, you said:


    You say it was morally right to execute people for cursing their parents, in the OT. Therefore it is morally right today to execute people for cursing their parents. Yes?
    So did you intentionally make your question misleading?

    Yes, of course you did. The proof is the fact that you ignored the whole rest of my response which already addresses your ridiculous “trap”.

    Good bye!

    I don’t discuss complex issues with dishonest jerks.

    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  18. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  19. #148
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,830
    Thanks
    604
    Thanked 1,383 Times in 1,079 Posts

    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    293912
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    So did you intentionally make your question misleading?

    Yes, of course you did. The proof is the fact that you ignored the whole rest of my response which already addresses your ridiculous “trap”.

    Good bye!

    I don’t discuss complex issues with dishonest jerks.
    I haven't been dishonest at all.

    You said what was morally right then, is morally right now. You also said it was morally right to put to death those who cursed their parents (then), but... not now?

    What's changed? Isn't it still immoral to curse one's parents? Or was that never immoral to begin with?

    You've said that the punishment for a "moral based crime" should remain the same today, as dictated in the OT. But you've given no logical reason for this, you've merely asserted it. Why should the punishment be exactly the same now as it was for a specific time and place, then?
    Last edited by glassjester; May 18th, 2019 at 11:28 AM.
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

  20. #149
    Silver Member Clete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Seated in the heavenly places at God's right hand, in Him!
    Posts
    9,772
    Thanks
    691
    Thanked 7,105 Times in 3,784 Posts

    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147777
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    I haven't been dishonest at all.

    You said what was morally right then, is morally right now. You also said it was morally right to put to death those who cursed their parents (then), but... not now?
    As I said, I explained in my post which you have now ignored twice.

    Dishonest.

    What's changed? Isn't it still immoral to curse one's parents? Or was that never immoral to begin with?
    I explained in my original answer. I'm not going to do it again.

    You've said that the punishment for a "moral based crime" should remain the same today, as dictated in the OT. But you've given no logical reason for this, you've merely asserted it.
    This is not only false, it an intentional lie. I used you own premise which you have no used to spring what you want to pretend is a trap by ignoring the explanation given in my answer.

    Why should the punishment be exactly the same now as it was for a specific time and place, then?
    This has been explain to you on more than one occassion. It isn't my fault that you willfully ignore it.

    Don't bother responding to me any further. I won't read it.


    "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to Clete For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (May 18th, 2019)

  22. #150
    Over 4000 post club glassjester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,830
    Thanks
    604
    Thanked 1,383 Times in 1,079 Posts

    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    293912
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    You've said that the punishment for a "moral based crime" should remain the same today, as dictated in the OT. But you've given no logical reason for this, you've merely asserted it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    This is not only false, it an intentional lie.

    Ok, let's look back.

    I asked...
    Quote Originally Posted by glassjester View Post
    So how do you know that specific penalties for specific crimes were intended for every nation, and not just for Israel?

    You answered...
    Quote Originally Posted by Clete View Post
    The punishment for a moral based crime is just as valid as is the crime itself.

    That's not an explanation. It's just an assertion. I ask, "How do you know the punishments should be exactly the same today?" and your answer boils down to, "because they are."
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us