Cases you think show the need for death penalty

aikido7

BANNED
Banned
Define justice.
I accept the standard definitions. But as far as this conversation is concerned, I look to the great prophets of the Hebrew Bible who cried out to God for justice to help turn around the sins of their people.

And the justice in the form of a "structural socialism" built into the Jewish society over and over again.

There are many instances of Jesus and justice, but I have found when posting about these on TOL they fail to even register with most self-defined Christians.
 

elohiym

Well-known member
We commanded the execution of adulterers, murders--even whole populations of people.

You identify as Christian so I assumed you were aware that God gave Israel a law that commanded adulterers and murderers, among other offenders, to be executed without mercy.

God just makes sure the laws of physics operate in their usual "divine consistency."

Is that how the Red Sea parted, or did Moses use a bucket brigade?

Why is Jesus against welfare and is for capitalism?

He's not.

Humans usually project their own fears on others. God has no fear.
He is above finite humanity in all respects.

I agree.

The God of Jesus was not violent or played one against the other.

Why would God be opposed to executing murderers? Life for life. Isn't that fair, reasonable.
 

aikido7

BANNED
Banned
Religious feelings aside, any case of adultery shows the need for execution for the good of society.
Wouldn't it be great if we kept all the good people over here and got all the evil ones over there?

Then all we would have to do is destroy them.

But how has that worked out in history?
 

aikido7

BANNED
Banned
You identify as Christian so I assumed you were aware that God gave Israel a law that commanded adulterers and murderers, among other offenders, to be executed without mercy. [/QUOTE]

This was the interpretation of God that Israel had in a tribal society of ancient times.

I have never believed in God as some sort of divine ethnic cleanser, a slaughterer of life or a jealous Creator to fear.



Is that how the Red Sea parted, or did Moses use a bucket brigade?
I do not take metaphoric or mythic language in the Bible literally. If you insist on going around saying the journey across the Red Sea means the actual water split into two parts, a la liberal Hollywood would have it, you miss the meaning.

The epic moral narrative of fleeing our "Pharaohs," wandering in a wilderness, and finally getting a glimpse of the Promised Land at last is the REAL truth of those ancient writings.

ALL sacred, holy religious writing is an interpretation. Even the Jews realized God was so awesome that his name was not to be uttered.

It is only through poetry, myth and metaphor that we humans can attempt to describe the Holy. We can only point to what we mean using words of comparison. That's what metaphors are.

Would you go around saying "My love is a red, red rose" and stubbornly grasping onto the idea that your wife, girlfriend or companion has petals and thorns on his/her body?

Really?

I think not.


He's not.
I don't believe so, either, but I have to accept that many other serious believers say the same thing.
We tend to find a Jesus that is congenial to us. But we also need to remember that Jesus disturbs. He did in his own day and does in ours. Many TOL posters would rather just retreat from anything Jesus actually taught. He is not for the faint-hearted or for those who feel they have the truth.


Why would God be opposed to executing murderers? Life for life. Isn't that fair, reasonable.
Not to me. Not for the world. Scapegoating and revenge are not the qualities of the God of Jesus. I just don't see it.

I realize the angry and defensive folks around us revel in the message of Revelation, which talks of a slaughter of the unfaithful so horrific that the blood flows up to the level of Jesus's horse's bridle for a distance of 200 miles.

I read the Bible differently. Seriously, not literally. I try to determine the history and cultural environment when the verse or passage was written. I need to discover what the texts meant to their original authors and audiences.

I try not to "read" the modern world back into the ancient past.

"The past is a foreign country. They do things differently there."
--J.P. Hartley
 

aikido7

BANNED
Banned
Please define what "standard definition" you are using.
I used to use an old student edition of Webster's, given to me by a late friend when I graduated.

Today I just visit dictionary.com.

Here is a copy of the definition of "Justice" that they have:


noun


1.

the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness:
to uphold the justice of a cause.


2.

rightfulness or lawfulness, as of a claim or title; justness of ground or reason:
to complain with justice.


3.

the moral principle determining just conduct.


4.

conformity to this principle, as manifested in conduct; just conduct, dealing, or treatment.


5.

the administering of deserved punishment or reward.


6.

the maintenance or administration of what is just by law, as by judicial or other proceedings:
a court of justice.


7.

judgment of persons or causes by judicial process:
to administer justice in a community.

Idioms




bring to justice, to cause to come before a court for trial or to receive punishment for one's misdeeds:
The murderer was brought to justice.




do justice, a.to act or treat justly or fairly.
b.to appreciate properly:
We must see this play again to do it justice.

to acquit in accordance with one's abilities or potentialities:
He finally got a role in which he could do himself justice as an actor.
 

Angel4Truth

New member
Hall of Fame
The actual definition is an even weight, or measure. That is why you see scales in reference to the law.

What is an even weight, for one who has murdered someone?
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
I no longer believe in killing anyone who commits a serious act of violence or sexual abuse or both.

We need to lock some of these people up for life--I'm not denying that. They need to be studied by doctors to understand why a person becomes a sociopathic murderer or a person who believes violence is the only way to respond to human conflict.

There have been some amazing breakthroughs that have filtered down to the public's awareness. A lot of it has to do with how a person is raised, and what sort of genetic code s/he has.

We are right on the cusp of many more breakthroughs.

Keep them alive. Study them. Learn what they are all about.
Be able to predict future criminal behavior.

Stop killing the innocent by mistake or design.

Study them? We already know what they're about. I'm thinking you would change your tune if...... Well, never mind. I'm pretty sure you prefer living in La La land.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member

Who determines what the crimes are and what the punishment is for the crimes?

How do you determine that you kill people for certain crimes?

Could you kill someone for a crime?

You do realize you are really not that much different than a Muslim?

They kill people for numerous crimes.


Those who are in charge. State/government, laws governing
our land. You didn't realize that already?

I guess not. Maybe he's gotten confused with all that thinking everything ended back in 70AD. :chuckle:
 

elohiym

Well-known member
The law was a schoolmaster to show no one could keep it, and that man needed a Savior.

I agree that the law was a schoolmaster, but not in the sense you are thinking. Obviously people could keep the law else Luke 1:6 is a lie. The Mosaic ordinances that condemned bodily function (eg. Lev 15:30) were meant to teach us that our flesh can never be perfect. Other ordinances, like the Scapegoat ritual on the Day of Atonement teach us about mercy and how the lamb of God takes away the sins of the world. It wasn't to teach us that we can never keep the law; we can love our neighbor and enemy thus fulfilling the law and the prophets.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
If you think it's ok to kill someone for a sin, you have no idea what the gospel says.

As I asked GM, please show me where the Apostle Paul said to kill people for certain sins?

I think it's okay to kill someone for certain CRIMES. They can answer for their sins against God when they stand before Him.

The Apostle Paul didn't discuss crimes and what should be done with those who commit them. I'm sure he knew enough to render to Caesar the things that were Caesar's, and to God the things that were God's.
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I guess not. Maybe he's gotten confused with all that thinking everything ended back in 70AD. :chuckle:

You're missing the point.

You are claiming the government of a country gets to determine what crimes are punishable by death.

If a government passed a law that says anyone who prints a Bible is to be put to death are you going to adhere to that law?
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
You're missing the point.

You are claiming the government of a country gets to determine what crimes are punishable by death.

If a government passed a law that says anyone who prints a Bible is to be put to death are you going to adhere to that law?

I think you're the one missing the point, and are simply trying to clear a path to some rabbit trail. What if the sky should fall...would you adhere to that?
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
I think it's okay to kill someone for certain CRIMES.

The only passages from the Bible you have to back your claim are from the old covenant law of Moses.

They can answer for their sins against God when they stand before Him.

No one answers for sins before God. ALL sins were paid for at the cross. It would be double jeopardy if sins are brought up again.

Do you not believe that Jesus paid the price for ALL sins on the cross?

The Apostle Paul didn't discuss crimes and what should be done with those who commit them.

The Apostle Paul said the following:

(1 Cor 5:12) What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?


I'm sure he knew enough to render to Caesar the things that were Caesar's, and to God the things that were God's.

That pertains to taxes.

The Apostle Paul said the following about enemies:

(Rom 12:20) On the contrary: "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head."
 

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Or being a homo like the Israelis?

Those Jewish homosexuals won't go to hell for homosexuality. Their sins were paid for on the cross.

Those Jewish homosexuals will go to hell because of their rejection of Jesus Christ.

There's really no difference between a homosexual Jew and a heterosexual Jew from a salvation standpoint. Both are going to hell because they reject Christ Jesus. It doesn't matter that one is more moral than the other.
 

glorydaz

Well-known member
That pertains to taxes.

1 Peter 2:13
Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
 
Top