Capital Punishment

[catholic_man]

Executions

I'm trying to open up a discussion on capital punishment.

When is it appropriate and when is it not? Or, is it never appropriate?

Most of you probably already heard that Saddam Hussein died via execution just a few hours ago.

I have nothing against Muslims or Islamic people who want peace. I met some good ones and those who scare me; truth be known, I have met good Catholics and those who scare me, too.

To make a long story short, a cousin of mine worked for the Fiduciary Corp in one of the twin towers. She lost her life the day the terrorist flew into the buildings on 9/11.

Since that time God has showed me not to be too quick to judge and categorize people. In fact, a good friend that I met since then is from Iraq along with her family. They are very good moral people and would bend over backwards to help anyone. My first encounter was met with skepticism, but my wife and I have gone over to her house for coffee several times. Of course, she is Chalcedonian Catholic and not Islamic. However, it has made me think twice about judging ALL Muslims just because some extremists killed my cousin.

When I first heard that they captured Saddam, then he went to trial and then that he would be executed then I jumped for joy. But now that he is gone I am sad that it came to that. War is never good nor is any untimely death.

I have always been told that one man's rights end where another man's begins.

Your thoughts?

[hillariousharry]

Two points:

Capital punishment for callous premeditated murder is morally right. But then I hesitate because of past miscarriages of justice. Executing the wrong person would be dreadful - you cant bring them back and life is so precious.

Democratically elected governments are selected by the people - if the majority vote for capital punishment, then that should be taken into account.

John

(Message edited by hillariousharry on December 30, 2006)

(Message edited by hillariousharry on December 30, 2006)

[catholic_man]

Do any of you think it will really make a difference?

It would seem that much of what is going on in the Middle East is rooted in religious war that in reality has been going on for centuries. For the American people to think that a couple of years of occupation to bring the cure...are sadly mistaken. The climate over there will take time, probably centuries. Even at that, there is no guarantee of freedom and justice for all.

CNN is doing a poll basically asking if Saddam's execution is a setback or opportunity. Please reference: http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/12/30/hussein.execution.feedback/index.html

Your thoughts?

BTW, correction to inital statement. My friend is technically a Chaldean Catholic, not Chalcedonian.

Here is a quote taken from CNN at http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/12/29/hussein.world.reaction/index.html

Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi

"A capital punishment is always tragic news, a reason for sadness, even if it deals with a person who was guilty of grave crimes. The position of the Church has been restated often. The killing of the guilty party is not the way to reconstruct justice and reconcile society. On the contrary there is a risk that it will feed a spirit of vendetta and sow new violence. In these dark times for the Iraqi people one can only hope that all responsible parties truly make every effort so that glimmers of reconciliation and peace can be found in such a dramatic situation."

[arron]

i fully believe in capital punishment . i would not want ot do it nor would i want it to ahppen to any of my people but if they did the crime it sometime has punishment with it, even though they may be forgiven

[hillariousharry]

Hi CMan

I dont think it will make any difference (ref ur posting)

Whilst I think that agencies such as Amnesty International are needful and worthy, such organisations can I think become somewhat woolly minded in areas of thought- it's barmy to say that it's wrong to take a life as justice meeted out for the crime of premeditated murder. The fact is, that there has to be law and order and murderers should have thought of the possible consequences before they did their premeditated evil acts. In any system there have to be ground rules to prevent chaos.

Each case has to be viewed taking into account the circumstances, but for Saddam Hussein, there was no doubt - I guess he had the easier option...imagine if he had been let loose in certain areas of Iraq.

I say lets get real and think a little bit more about those who have been tortured and brutally killed.

Anyway, I resent my Government's money going on keeping individuals alive who should be long gone because of the evil nature of their crimes.

John

[catholic_man]

HH,

Good point! I agree with you and Arron that there has to be rules and laws in place, else chaos would reign much worse than it is now. We have to make a statement that murderes like Saddam will be punished. If people see that even the leaders are held accountable, then maybe they will think twice. Point taken!

Since I had a family member killed by terrorist, I do take it to heart. I worked with my government for several months setting up systems to help thwart terrorist, something of familiarity for me. I personally know about some of the security measures and think that we have to protect the innocent. Okay, so now you know some of my background.

Now the question is...what about cases, such as in Texas, where mothers kill their own children and then claim insanity? Should they not be punished with the death? If a father did that to his children, especially in Texas, I'm sure he would fry for it. The problem is that anyone who kills another UNJUSTLY is insane. So from my perspective, the insanity plea is bogus.

If you commit the crime, be prepared to be punished. Then I hear of cases where the mentally ill killed someone. How do you handle that case? Of course the legal system will handle it, but HOW SHOULD they handle it?

[catholic_man]

Catechism of the Catholic Church

Here is an excerpt from http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/fifth.html

Capital Punishment
2266 The State's effort to contain the spread of behaviors injurious to human rights and the fundamental rules of civil coexistence corresponds to the requirement of watching over the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict penalties commensurate with the gravity of the crime. The primary scope of the penalty is to redress the disorder caused by the offense. When his punishment is voluntarily accepted by the offender, it takes on the value of expiation. Moreover, punishment, in addition to preserving public order and the safety of persons, has a medicinal scope: as far as possible it should contribute to the correction of the offender.[67]

2267 The traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude, presupposing full ascertainment of the identity and responsibility of the offender, recourse to the death penalty, when this is the only practicable way to defend the lives of human beings effectively against the aggressor.
"If, instead, bloodless means are sufficient to defend against the aggressor and to protect the safety of persons, public authority should limit itself to such means, because they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
"Today, in fact, given the means at the State's disposal to effectively repress crime by rendering inoffensive the one who has committed it, without depriving him definitively of the possibility of redeeming himself, cases of absolute necessity for suppression of the offender 'today ... are very rare, if not practically non-existent.' [68]

[granite]

"Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made He man." - Gen. 9:6

"Ye shall take no satisfaction for the life of a murderer... but he shall surely be put to death." - Num. 35:31

"For blood it defileth the land: and the land cannot be cleansed of the blood that is shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it." - Num. 35:33

[hillariousharry]

Hi Granite,

Your last post quotes scriptures only. Scriptures dont always apply to our day and age, as they often were dealing with the situations of those times.

One has to be discerning as to what is relevant to our day. And I feel that those 3 verses quoted are general statements which serve limited purpose within the context of capital punishment today. Yes, principles there but on their own, not too helpful.



On a lighter note, its too late today to come back with massive exposition (lol)...maybe next weekend!!

Thanks for your postings today elsewhere - I will give church a miss tomorrow and accept them as sermons for the Lords day tomorrow.

Regards and wishing you many chuckles in the new year.

John

[arron]

scriptures dont apply to our day and age???? we always have the word to lead us in the right way and it is the same and never does change

[hillariousharry]

Hi Arron,

May I correct your posting (3081) above which misquotes me - I had previously said "Scriptures dont ALWAYS apply to our day and age". The missing "always" makes a vast difference.

"we always have the Word to lead us in the right way" - true but I think that I would be rather naive to just pick out scriptures which I thought applied to life's situations, without fully considering the context in which they were written, e.g. OT judgements which addressed those days.

I think your posting, whilst to be respected Arron, doesn't go far enough and contains generalisation.

Respect....a few chuckles be yours today.

John (-hillarious h)

[shem]

No one has the right to take the life of any other creature - man or beast. There are no exceptions. Imprisonment is the only alternative for criminals, and all civilized and/or Spiritual people recognize this.

[hillariousharry]

Respect your view Shem but disagree.

But as for "all civilised and/or spiritual people recognising this" - that's a generalisation or maybe a statement saying that one is neither civilised or spiritual if they disagree with you in regard to no one having the right to take life.

I consider myself quite normal like most other people...sensitive to issues, but......I still object to the State ( and tax payers money) keeping alive someone who deserves punishment by death....

Xians would often believe that God has ordained and delegated to governments, in order for justice to be seen.. and provided those government are truly democratic and morally responsible, then individuals who choose to reject laws and injure others, deserve the appropriate punishment.

My only hesitation would be any doubt as to who committed the crime...as for Saddam, no doubt and he received a just punishment.

Regards,

John

(Message edited by hillariousharry on December 31, 2006)

[arron]

capitol pubishment was insituted by GOD HIMSELF if you would take what the bible says instead of what you think you would be better off

[hillariousharry]

Whlst I take your point Arron, God gave us a brain to work things out on a rational basis and to apply reason. We are not robotic.

If we followed the set pattern in the OT to the letter, then I hate to think what kind of society we would find ourselves in. Whilst the Bible guides, it doesnt mean that we need to follow every principle to the letter.

Similarly in the NT - so much there was addressed to the churches of that day. I recall belonging to a church where women wearing hats was dogmatically preached and failure to do so would exempt one from participating. That was Assemblies of God in England. They would not err cos they believed that what applied to the early church in the regard should be practiced now. Todate that belief has changed.

Perhaps I have digressed slightly but my thought is focussed on scriptural principles and their outworking in our age.

I think that whilst your thought is to be respected, it is I think rather naive and short-sighted.

I take what the Bible says but seek to take some responsibility as to its outworking in my life.

In earlier years my Xian faith was somewhat unhealthy cos I rarely questioned. Now responsible questioning has enhanced my faith.

Happy new year and lots of chuckling moments be yours.

John

[sunshinesaint]

I think it is sad as well...
I personally would not want to be then one to take life or to endorse taking of life.

I have not had any personal losses to terrorism and so I also do not understand the pain that goes with that.

What I felt with Hussein's death and the video footage of it was sadness. What he did to people was terrible but I still found it VERY disturbing watching him go to his death. It made me feel so sad!

I wonder if he was slight schizophrenic??? His personality was so obscure duing his trial, one minute irrate the next quiet and demure.

I think he was half in "revolutionary HUSSEIN mode" and the other in reality - that he was going to die.

[bear]

HH,

You are correct that scriptures need to be applied and interpreted to today.

Iam with Granite, though, for CP was sanctioned by God under the Old Cov.

I fully Support Capital punishment. I believe that God has ordained Government, and That CP is not considered murder.

[sunshinesaint]

bear -

what about Hitler?? Should the world have just left him to it...

what about Jesus's actions in NT when the law was to stone the woman...and he did not???

I do not ever think things are clear cut, that is why I believe that judgement is left up to the Lord - Thank goodness!!!


I think that capital punishment is a scary thing to get involved with, let alone agree with.

I personally have a fear of God about this, as he is the only one who makith life, therefore I do not wnat to be involved with "taking away life". Life is so precious! Shouldn't be mucked around with.

[hillariousharry]

Can "leaving certain things to the Lord" become a kind of cop-out for not facing up to human responsibilities, which He would expect us to take, including decisions of national importance?

The topic is not clear cut and for years I inwardly struggled with the issues in terms of executing the wrong person.....but often there is never any doubt about one's guiltiness.

Bottom line is, if God ordained and delegated, then fair and responsible Governments have a right and a duty to make laws in matters of justice...which means that where matters are not clear cut and more sensitive, the the nations people are consulted first. Here in the UK the Government voted not to bring back hanging...but I do think that the people should have voted too, other than just in Parliament.

I do respect your points sunshinesaint and no it isnt an easy subject.

HH

[catholic_man]

Hello everyone!

Here is an excerpt from an interesting article. I will place the quote and the source.

"Death penalty statistics in a year-end report from the Death Penalty Information Center in Washington offered reasons for optimism among opponents of capital punishment. For starters, the group noted the results of a newly released Gallup Poll showing that more Americans support alternative sentences of life without parole over the death penalty as punishment for murder."

http://www.queenofpeace.ca/Death_Penalty_Support_Wanes.htm

So what about the alternative...life without parole?

[hillariousharry]

Hi CM

Total respect for the American Poll - and a agreed majority should be listened to.

As for life without parole - yes, the very least for premeditated murder. A reasonable compromise I think. Any consideration of parole in those circumstances would I believe be immoral and unjust. And...needless to say really completely unjust towards the victims' families.

Whilst I am a stickler for human rights ( my job involves such) I think criminals should be treated with dignity as they serve their sentences, but all the silly stuff about them having certain enjoyments and added comforts in life has gone too far and again is offensive to the victims. To some considerable extent, human rights issues have gone off balance.

The above compromise is reasonable, but I still feel that a crime deserving death is reasonable too.

Furthermore, if the news reports were right about Iraqi officials verbally abusing Saddam Hussein as he stood on the gallows, then that should never have been allowed; also unofficial videoing. That kind of thing is appalling whatever Hussein had done, even though in my view he deserved to die.

HH

[catholic_man]

HH,

I agree about eliminating the 'so called' conveniences for criminals. I hope they didn't let Saddam play the new Play Station that everyone is killing each other over!! http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/lol.gif

Yes, they are there for <font color="ff0000">punishment</font> not for comfort. Of course, they should not be raped or mistreated according to human dignity. However, a jail cell with ONLY food, water and a toilet is NOT against human dignity.

You make a good point. We shouldn't become worse than the criminal, yet we shouldn't just hand over all sorts of 'goodies' to them simply because we feel sorry for them being in prison.
http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/proud.gif

[bear]

Sunshinesaint said:

"what about Jesus's actions in NT when the law was to stone the woman...and he did not???"

One important thing to point out about the story you mentioned. The text tells us that they "caught her in the act". The law required that the man also be brought to be stoned. Jesus shows mercy, and at the same time, by saying "He who is without sin, let him cast the first stone", showing the religious leaders their error.

I believe that Jesus is not just making a blanket statement, but pin pointing the error of the leaders. That is why I believe that they dropped their stones and walked away, not because they thought "Oh yeah, I have sin too." That was not their mindset.

Just my take on the issue.

[sunshinesaint]

Bear - fair enough.
I take that verse to mean that they became aware of their sin. And that Jesus's comment was about judging others.

Hillarious Harry said, "then fair and responsible Governments have a right and a duty to make laws in matters of justice"

I think that the problem comes in defining what is "fair and responsible" govnts...I am sure that Hitler's people all thought that he was fair and responsible at some point along the line.

People can all put on fascades and trick people. People all have selfish motives, especially in government. I believe that we are all sinners and all sin is selfishness in a nutshell.

I don't have all the answers and I also don't like the idea of people's own money being used to pay for people's time on prison. I am note sure where you guys are all from BUT here in New Zealand they have alot of privileges in jail - satellite TV, Christmas lunches and the most good looking cells in comparison to say ones in Indonesia - where your own family's money determines basically whether you live or die in jail. Your family are the ones that have to bring you food etc.

What do you guys reckon about the Schapelle Corby case?? Aussie girl who went to Bali on holiday and got "caught" with drugs - which she claims were placed in her bags.
Anyways...the Bali bombers - terrorists that killed stax of people in nightclub attack are in the the same jail and the guy just got his sentence reduced to something like 2 years....YET he killed so many people and Schapelle who could possibly be innocent is in jail to rot...and some of the Bali 9 - who are now sentenced to death - by firing squad.

Is there govt fair????

[bear]

SSS, you said:

"I take that verse to mean that they became aware of their sin. And that Jesus's comment was about judging others."

I do as well, but understanding a bit of history also helps. You see, from the other texts concerning these leaders, they would not have been moved just by Jesus' comment, but the realization of their sin in this case caused a reaction...Just my opinion.

Second, no, their Government is not fair. I would hope that the Government of the USA is a bit more fair. I think it really depends on where you live; the country.

[arron]

the bible give capital punishment. we truly or to judge weather or not it is the right one say for instance if one accidently killed some one they are not guilty of murder and should not be punished for such.
consider sadaam hussan yes he was guilty GUILTY GUILTY and should be punished they hung him they should have, they should have hung hin, then shot him , then cut his head off. he was desering of all this and is roasting in hell right now.

[hillariousharry]

Fair and responsible governments....whilst I may not always like what I see in the Government here in England, it is good that the judicial system is reasonable, and despite even deserving criticisms at times, I think that generally it has a good judicial system. That's what I meant!!

Might I add that pity help us here if our Parliament's members were made of of mainly borne again believers!! I dont think true democracy would result...just imagine how things would go!! Control? Manipulation? Rejection of those who failed to adhere to Xian principles? No...quite happy with my secular government thank you. lol

HH

HH

[hillariousharry]

Arron

I agree with your conviction about the need for capital punishment. But I think your posting goes overboard...seems to be seething with anger rather than rational thoughts.

We cannot go back to an uncivilised society - humane forms of execution should be the order of our day....maybe lethal injection would be the preferred method...

We must not allow our convictions and emotions be overcome with thoughts of gruesome revenge.

HH

[catholic_man]

HH, Agreed!
Arron, I understand your frustration. Remember that a relative of mine died in WTC in NYC. I have dealt with my share of resentment towards the terrorists.

Do we let them get away with it? No way!

However, we should show the type of dignity that THEY SHOULD have shown to us. Otherwise, it turns into a really bloody backyard brawl. I understand that over 3,000 Americans have already lost their lives in the war in Iraq. It is a shame when you compare it to the 148 that Saddam killed. There were a few thousands lives lost in the WTC on 9/11, too.

Our mission should be to stop the oppressor, and not to nuke everyone in Iraq. I used to think that way, too ("Nuke 'em and be done!"). But since then I made friends with a Catholic family from Iraq. They are really good people and really pray for their relatives who are still stuck over there. I could not imagine 'nuking' without a specific target. Setting off nukes every 10 miles in Iraq is not the answer.

Do we have the power? Yes! But just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD.

Yes, I understand completely the reason for hanging Saddam...in order to make an example and to keep him from causing harm, later. What if his militants blasted through and he escaped? I understand that.

However, I hope that he asked God for forgiveness and that God granted it. My dad always said, "As soon as you do not want someone in heaven with you, then don't worry...you won't be there either!"

I dealt with my pain and moved on. God showed me that it was wrong to hate the haters. In fact, doesn't he tell us in scriptures to love our enemies and to pray for those who despitefully use us?

[arron]

he was a devil and was hell bound and was deserving of what he got

[catholic_man]

Arron,

I agree that he got the punishment meted out from the new Iraqi government as per their legal system. He committed the crime and had to be punished accordingly.

However, as much as my speculations are that he and the terrorists are directly hellbound...well I leave that judgment to God.

Now, don't get me wrong with what I am about to say. He and the other terrorists have been deceived by a horrible blunderous teaching that they should 'kill the infidel'. Unfortunately for us, they think of us as infidels. Definition of infidel...comes from the Latin word 'Fide', which means 'Faith'. Therefore, we are 'without faith' in their minds.

They, of course, are severely brainwashed from birth. They live to die, and we as Christians, die to live!

Now I'm not saying that we should pat them on the back and say "Oh you poor, poor deceived man! Here let me give you some money!" Nope. Of course I have heard that some of the money from drug trafficking has gone over there, but that's beside the point.

I feel bad for them that they are so brainwashed and pray that they will see the light. I do not know if God forgave him at the last second any more than if God forgave Judas Iscariot.

Were their sins worthy of hell? Yes! And so are mine when I commit them, although I have never killed or raped anyone. The point is that the bible teaches us in Matthew 7 to "Judge not...the same measurement will be used to measure us that we use to measure others." (paraphrased)

Therefore, since I want God to show me mercy at my death, then I have to leave it in the hands of the Lord whether or not he showed mercy for these villains. Of course, that doesn't mean that we free them and give them stuff.

[ezekiel_37]

I think that the bible is clear on the matter.

If the people punish murderers and rapists the way that they did in the bible, then these things would cease to happen.


When a bad guy sees the result of a capital punishment, it may tend to make him/her think twice about committing any of these disgusting sins.


Kill them and let God sort it out.

otherwise we will have rapists and murderers roaming around on the streets, days or months after the sin is committed.


I think that all Christians should be for the death penalty, God is!

Peace in Christ
c

[trainedobserver]

You know, oddly enough, when I was a Christian I was all for the death penalty too.

However, since becoming an atheist, I find I feel and think very differently about the issue. It is a fact that the system routinely convicts innocent people. I had to ask myself, "How many innocent people is an acceptable number?" I think zero is the right answer. Therefore the only way to achieve that is to stop executing people and police the system.

The "death row" inmates on the worst end of the spectrum could be placed in complete isolation and extreme austerity for life. Penal islands need to make a comeback.

Another reason, and I think a very good one is that I don't think that the state should be able to kill its citizens.


(Message edited by trainedobserver on January 03, 2007)

[soul1958]

"The "death row" inmates on the worst end of the spectrum could be placed in complete isolation and extreme austerity for life. Penal islands need to make a comeback. "

My question is... Is THAT humane? Ethical? Loving? Just?

I was just doing an essay for an ethics course on this topic...

Might I (assuming: guilty as all billy hell, admittedly and with all the DNA testing you want) ask to be put to sleep and my request be granted, rather than to spend the rest of my life in some god-forsaken place with other insane convicted inmates or worse, without ANYBODY...I would go insane. God, Please, kill me!

Or is long-term suffering(vindication?) what we're after?

(Or... is that Australia all over again? )

(Message edited by soul1958 on January 03, 2007)

(Message edited by soul1958 on January 03, 2007)

[trainedobserver]

"My question is... Is THAT humane? Ethical? Loving? Just?"

What do you suggest? Behavioral modification, i.e. Clockwork Orange? Frontal lobotomy? Suspended animation? Freeze 'em and shoot 'em into space?

You're right of course. There is still a danger of an innocent being punished so the 'standing room only' cell idea is probably almost as bad as death.

I admit, it is a perplexing problem. If a person is a danger to society, society has a right to protect itself though, don't you agree?

Oh, and they should send everyone who is in this country illegally in our justice system back to their home country pronto. That would free up a great deal of room.

"Or... is that Australia all over again? "

Honestly, it seems like a good idea. At least they should make the inmates grow their own food and so forth. There is no reason why they can't.

I don't know. It's another one of those seemingly unsolvable problems. We have the means to render anyone helpless for the rest of their lives, brain washing, induced strokes, etc., etc. So we don't have to really kill anyone to make them a 'non-threat'. Humane? Probably not. Tough question.

All that being said, should I ever encounter a rape in progress I would shoot the rapist through the head without hesitation. Same goes for anyone threatening my family. Without hesitation. When the rubber meets the road and you're staring down the barrel of a gun or feeling the sharp prick of a knife on your throat, you will behave in a natural fashion, that is 'fight or flight.' A healthy being will fight for its life with all of the energy and resources available to it or run like hell. Society is in a constant 'fight or flight' mode over criminal justice. Good grief I've been rambling.

[franklin]

I have for most of my life been AGAINST capital punishment. And still am. But sometimes in particular cases, like Saddam Hussein, where there is no doubt of the crimes he committed I can understand the need.

The main reason I am against capital punishment is because of the imperfect legal system that will inadvertingly allow the innocent to be put to death. Not just by mistake but knowingly also by corruption of the system.

Not all police and State Attorneys are true public servants or angels.

Only God knows all the facts. OJ still claims he is innocent. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/wink.gif

But when it comes to myself, a loved one or even someone I do not even know whose life is threatened then my instinct would be to injure or kill to protect a life.

Those convicted of a capital crime such as murder or rape should spend "LIFE" in solitude in prison where they will not be a threat to anyone. No parole, no shortened sentence. Just throw the key away and keep them there until they die.

That way society is no longer threatened by them and there is no chance of executing the possible innocent.

I, of course, have mixed feelings to be honest about what would be done to someone who would possibly kill a member of my family And I was not there to defend them.

Or someone who would rape and kill a child, kind of falls into the Saddam Hussein category. That will always be an unresolved issue that no one that is against capital punishment can definitely say how they would react unless it did happen.

There is no absolute common "Christian" viewpoint on this.

Just my thoughts. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

[fatherofaking]

the concept of death is what is at issue here.

is death a bad thing?

soul just described it as having desireable qualities when faced with other choices.

in this culture death is almost always seen as the worst case scenario.

unless spoken of in a joking manner.

most, even in the most herrendous of circumstances would choose life, unless they thought that death was somehow an escape.

what people believe happens to them when they die would certainly make a difference as to what they would choose if faced with isolation or death.

having a general consensous on what happens when we die is the reason it is so hard to know what is right.

[soul1958]

..”should I ever encounter a rape in progress I would shoot the rapist through the head without hesitation...”

Thank you! That’s what I would want you to do if I were being raped.

Do you recall the movie, Papillion? (and he was sent to a penal colony once too, right? That’s what I think would be the more accurate outcome, rather than a budding agricultural society)

Behavioral modification, i.e. Clockwork Orange? Frontal lobotomy? Suspended animation? Freeze 'em and shoot 'em into space?

LOL... seriously tho, would these not cost society more (economically) than just locking them up (even if on death row)? And still, if I had my choice...kill me.

If a person is a danger to society, society has a right to protect itself though, don't you agree?

Absolutely. Whole-heartedly.

I have to fall back on my grandfather’s lecture on hunting... “don’t torture them; just kill ‘em.” And the philosophy of my great uncle, who used to say, “hang ‘em!” And upon being asked about the new insanity plea when it was starting to be used, he said, “If they’re that crazy, hang ‘em!” http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

<font size="-2">(I notice we have lost track of God in this... hmmm...)</font>}

[sunshinesaint]

I think it is hopeless task discussing any sort of "jail term" as appropriate punishment as every country has a different std and as my post above re Bali bombers etc highlghted..

I am so against "death row" - these guys are on death row in the USA for years - what's up with that!!! I watched on tv the other night about "Karla Tucker" I find it shocking how these people have to wait and wait til their death - this is the worst thing - it is vile!!!

Personally I think it is better in this case for them to have shot Hussein when they found him rather than drag out what they did.

IN the case of rapists perhaps they should castrate? Anyone up for this?
I feel more strongly against rapists than murderers - as they murder someone and as another post said sometimes death is not so bad! But living with rape scars is unbearable!
Castration I say!

A poor man here in NZ was raped by another man over a number of terrible hours.
Some people think oh rape is rape BUT after I gave birth I had some terrible "damage" done down there! It took me almost 1 whole year to recover from a small anal fissure - a SMALL one not visible to the eyer really! It was so painful - so imagine the tearing from a rape!!!
It makes me mad!

[catholic_man]

soul1958,

I agree that the 'insanity' plea is a cop out!

For someone to commit a murder, they must be inane...everyone of them. Therefore, from my perspective the insanity plea means nothing.

I am certainly not for torture. I agree that when someone is a threat to society that governments must act to reduce that threat however it needs to be done.

Here's the problem. What about those who are really innocent that are put to death, because of a flawed system? Is that fair? How should it be handled?

[sunshinesaint]

catholic man - I do not think that they should be put to death.
Take the case of, "William ''Tommy'' Zeigler"
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1228-23.htm
friends of mine in NZ write to this man.
He is innocent and on detah row - perhaps you Americans out there could write to your congressmen about him so that he won't be put to death - at least you can say that you did something about it.

[catholic_man]

Sunshinesaint,

You absolutely see my point. What should be the tolerance rate of executing the wrongly accused?? DNA evidence has exonerated several who were wrongly accused from being in the wrong place at the wrong time. It is sad that there are still others fighting for their life.

On the flipside, there is no sin in a person protecting themselves and family during a crime in progress. If someone breaks in and threatens the life of my family, I plan to take action. If I have no choice but to use lethal force to stop the criminal then so be it. The moral thing would be to disable the criminal using deadly force as a last resort. But if you are in the heat of the moment you will do whatever it takes. You won't sit there saying, "Excuse me I need to make a priority list of how I am going to disable you; if that doesn't work I'll kill you!" Nope. That won't happen. When confronted I believe most people will react based on the adrenaline rush at the time...fight or flight.

The problem with analyzing a crime scene after the fact is relying on evidence that may not be properly collected. My uncle is now a forensic scientist after having retired as a deputy sheriff in a large metropolitan area. He could tell you just how tricky it is to get the evidence right!

My analysis is that the system is and most likely always will be flawed. Therefore, how many innocent people have to be wrongfully executed? Shouldn't the threshold be zero??

Now if there is obvious evidence, and that person poses a risk to society then I believe that death is necessary. However, I believe we should explore all other means, first.

Wouldn't you agree?

(Message edited by catholic_man on January 04, 2007)

[trainedobserver]

"is death a bad thing? "

Hell yes!
Death bad. Life good. Life has to be pretty bad to make death look attractive.

Dead things don't move and they start to stink. (...he's been dead four days, surely he stinketh!)
Dead things can spread disease or they can fertilize crops but that's about all they can manage. They make couch potatoes look like Olympic athelites.


Since this is the only "Life" we have any evidence of existing, to willingly forfeit it for something you 'heard' or 'read' about might be waiting for you, is the ultimate fool hearty mistake.

To revere death and to "look forward to it" is to totally misunderstand and waste the only existence we actually know of.

In truth, death is necessary and a important part of the cycle of life. Death is neither good nor evil. It is simply part of the structure of life. Every story has a beginning, a middle, and an end. Our 'end' is simply a natural part of life we must accept. All who live do so only briefly, then they die and stay dead a very, very, long time. Four million years into death and you will have barely gotten started. An infinity of nonexistence awaits, do everything you can to live this life to the fullest possible. Don't believe the fever dreams of ancient tribesmen or modern confidence men, believe your senses and your reasoning mind, not someone else's fiction. I'm rambling again.

[fatherofaking]

this is just your opinion TO.

unless of course you know something that i don't?

it is the same issue as the existance or non-existance of god.

it seems to me that if death has no meaning on any level but to feed the earth then we should stop using coffens.

[trainedobserver]

"this is just your opinion TO"

What? The fact that I think you are gambling that something you've read or heard about, for which you have no real evidence, exists and is more desirable than this world and is not just wishful thinking? Isn't that true?

"it seems to me that if death has no meaning on any level but to feed the earth then we should stop using coffens."

Some folks are doing that sort of thing. My son wants to buried in such a way that he will feed a tree that will be planted with him. Apparently there are people doing that sort of thing. I'll be cremated.

[hillariousharry]

Hi CMan

Ref your posting 2 Jan (no 141) - found it helpful and touching.

John - HH

[catholic_man]

HH,

I appreciate it. Here is an article that I wrote when asked by the local paper when asked to remember 9/11. I am bleeping out some of the personal information. I hope that we can remove country boundaries and sing in unison in our humanity for humanity.

Article:
What Independence and Freedom Mean to Me

You can’t use your checking account to get it. You can’t cash in your Cetificate of Deposit nor take out a loan to pay for it. You see, freedom isn’t about money…it’s about value. Oh it’s paid for alright, paid for by all of the brave men and women who fought for a better life. So what do we do about it to pay our debt of gratitude? We do it by raising our children to be respected functioning members of society. We teach them VALUE. Oh, we do it by helping a neighbor in need, by teaching a child how to catch a ball, by voting for our elected officials, by taking that weekend getaway, by going to work everyday and simply by going to church. Cash in on it while you can! The offer still stands. It’s there for the taking, but the price of freedom has never been free. We honor the fallen that believed in it and has given us a renewed cause to believe…not because of how they died, but for how they lived and WHY they died. My cousin, XXXXXXXXXX believed it by going to work everyday to support her family. You see, she died in the second tower in New York City on September 11, 2001.

[trsrinheaven]

Catholic man,
Continued hard heartedness without seeking God for his infinite wisdom in this continues the injustice of the broken system including incarceration and prisons.

I am against all capital punishment as I see the Bibles New Testament is. We no longer live under the Old Testament without the Holy Spirit and the penalty of sin, with forgiveness being paid for.

But here is a dilemma. FEAR! Saddam Hussein horrendously tortures and mass murders thousands of innocent people.

These same people that lived under his tyranny are in such fear of him staying alive that given the history he might somehow escape and return to his tyranny even worse. They also fear that this will encourage his agitating followers to continue their terrorism.

So how do you solve this?
Is it justified in cases where there is such a horrendous evil done by Hussein his henchmen and even his children?

The problem I had in the past of executions were those who were perhaps wrongly executed or those who did not kill premeditated. DNA has helped some of those but still some slip throught the cracks, and overzealous prosecuters, poor defense lawyers, public oppinion all make for an imperfect system.

The whole prison system is unjust and inadequate for that matter. Too many people are under the mistaken idea to just build more prisons.
With over 80% reciticism and no rehabilitation being done to change the minds of criminals locked up all day under horrendous conditions, its long overdue to change the system. Their are better ways to that actually do rehabilitate offenders.
It cost taxpayers 2000% more to house prisoners than to rehabilitate them. Most can become productive members of society. The system is unfair and unjust. Muderers in some states get less time than a car thief, and in some cases than a dui. It is not a higly publicized thing.
The same crime done in a rural community will often get more prison time then a even a worse crime in a big city. It is not fair across the board and not spelled out equally.

It is time to care about and remember those "prisoners as those in prison with them" (AS THE BIBLE STATES) for the good of all of us. Neglect of this problem only makes it worse and leaves it up to the hard hearted non problem solvers who make it worse.
It will benefit both the law abiding ones and those who can be rehabilitated. The possibilitie are worth the effort. This lock them up and throw away the key evil attitude and out of sight out of mind needs to stop.
There is a better more productive way and stewardship of human lives for all civilized societies.

[catholic_man]

Apparently the hanging of Saddam's relatives didn't go as planned. Please see the link below for the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/16629656/

Obviously those who oppose capital punishment, I share you thoughts and know your opinion, although I think it depends on how effective it is to stop the criminal and save lives.

But of those who are for capital punishment, what about the methods used?

[hillariousharry]

Yes for capital punishment, but hesitate on its reintroduction in the UK, cos of possible miscarriages of justice. Hanging? Prefer a more humane method.

Hows u CM - seems a long time no speak. I've been imprisoned in the G12 forum....they wouldn't let me out until I subscribed to the segragation ruling at the encouter retreats....now I have to cope with the thought of being separated from Eleanor who I worship and adore.

Such segragation...for many useful. For me, absolute silliness. So I will have to become a silly billy now.

Mind you, I could attend those segregation retreats in X dressing mode. Two fold reasoning here: 1. Get to stay with Eleanor. 2. Fulfillment of my long held fetish.

What drivel I write!

Blessings and TC

John - HH

[pilgrim]

Hillariousharry,

You wrote," hesitate on its reintroduction in the UK". You also wrote in an earlier message, "I hesitate because of past miscarriages of justice. Executing the wrong person would be dreadful - you cant bring them back and life is so precious."
We are humans and miscarriages of justice will always happened either deliberately or by mistake. Any country that practise capital punishment will always execute some innocent people. This is one on the reasons why capital punishment is so awful and it should never be practised. It was never practised by New Testament Christians.

I pray that capital punishment is never reintroduced in the Uk. Innocent people had been killed in the past in the UK and more innocent people will be killed in the UK is capital punishment is ever reintroduced. The innocent victim of a miscarriage of justice could be anyone! It could easily be you or a member of your family.

The society should be protected, so a long prison sentence should be used instead for dangerous criminals. The prison system should do the possible to regenerate the criminal.
I also believe that by putting a criminal in prison the the society gives the criminal a longer time to repent and to have the chance to know God. I believe that only God should have they right to take a life.


Also the New Testament Church were persecuted but they NEVER, NEVER, NEVER persecuted anyone. So Capital Punishment was not preached or practised in the New Testament church. I do not believe that I can call myself a Christian and believe in capital punishment at the same time.

Jesus said, whoever is without sin throw her the first stone... Jesus was the only one who was and is without sin but he did not punish the woman. He did not order the capital punishment of anyone who committed a worse crime like murder either. Paul was a dangerous murderer and he got the chance to repent and become one of the greatest apostles for Christ. The New Testament Christians did not try to sentence Paul to capital punishment. They forgave Paul instead although many christians had been killed by Paul's orders. But Paul did repented and he was not dangerous anymore! Christians need to follow the example of Christ and the New Testament Church.

I do not believe in capital punishment because so many innocent people had been killed in that way in any country that practised capital punishment.

Even Jesus Christ who was sinless and completely innocent was killed by capital punishment.

I am also a pacifist and I do no believe in war.

Human beings should not have the right to take a life only God should have that right.

The bible says,"But the meek shall inherit the earth; and shall delight themselves in the abundance of peace."
Psalm 37:11

(Message edited by pilgrim on January 29, 2007)

[yaakov2]

<font color="0000ff">Also the New Testament Church were persecuted but they NEVER, NEVER, NEVER persecuted anyone.</font>

A short review of history proves you completly wrong. Just the list of persecution from Christians is so long that this website breaks it out from the years 70 - 1200, 1200 -1800, and 1800 to present times. This is the link of 1200-1800.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/jud_pers3.htm

A short sample from this page:

1205: Pope Innocent III wrote to the archbishops of Sens and Paris that "the Jews, by their own guilt, are consigned to perpetual servitude because they crucified the Lord...As slaves rejected by God, in whose death they wickedly conspire, they shall by the effect of this very action, recognize themselves as the slaves of those whom Christ's death set free..."

1215: The Fourth Lateran Council approved canon laws requiring that "Jews and Muslims shall wear a special dress." They also had to wear a badge in the form of a ring. This was to enable them to be easily distinguished from Christians. This practice later spread to other countries.

1227: The Synod of Narbonne required Jews to wear an oval badge. This requirement was reinstalled during the 1930's by Hitler, who changed the oval badge to a Star of David.

1229: The Spanish inquisition starts. Later, in 1252, Pope Innocent IV authorizes the use of torture by the Inquisitors.

1236: Pope Gregory ordered that church leaders in England, France, Portugal and Spain confiscate Jewish books on the first Saturday of Lent.

1259: A "synod of the archdiocese in Mainz ordered Jews to wear yellow badges."

1261: Duke Henry III of Brabant, Belgium, stated in his will that "Jews...must be expelled from Brabant and totally annihilated so that not a single one remains, except those who are willing to trade, like all other tradesmen, without money-lending and usury."

[pilgrim]

yaakov2,

By New Testament Christians I refer to Christians during the time that the New Testament was written and also to to the time that Paul and Peter were still alive. These Christians where persecuted but they never persecuted any one. Read the New Testament the story of these christians is written there and you will see with your own eyes that they never persecuted anyone.
The only way to see how a real christian should behave is to go directly to the source document ie the New Testament itself. You can start by reading the book of Acts and see the New Testament Church in action.

The people who practised the inquisition and other murderers were not christians. They were religious people who dare to call themselves christian but they were not christians.

I also believe that the reconstrutionist theology is a false theology and not a christian theology

[wyoming]

<font size="-2"><font color="0077aa">1205: Pope Innocent III wrote to the archbishops of Sens and Paris that "the Jews, by their own guilt, are consigned to perpetual servitude because they crucified the Lord...As slaves rejected by God, in whose death they wickedly conspire, they shall by the effect of this very action, recognize themselves as the slaves of those whom Christ's death set free..."

1215: The Fourth Lateran Council approved canon laws requiring that "Jews and Muslims shall wear a special dress." They also had to wear a badge in the form of a ring. This was to enable them to be easily distinguished from Christians. This practice later spread to other countries.

1227: The Synod of Narbonne required Jews to wear an oval badge. This requirement was reinstalled during the 1930's by Hitler, who changed the oval badge to a Star of David.

1229: The Spanish inquisition starts. Later, in 1252, Pope Innocent IV authorizes the use of torture by the Inquisitors.

1236: Pope Gregory ordered that church leaders in England, France, Portugal and Spain confiscate Jewish books on the first Saturday of Lent.

1259: A "synod of the archdiocese in Mainz ordered Jews to wear yellow badges."

1261: Duke Henry III of Brabant, Belgium, stated in his will that "Jews...must be expelled from Brabant and totally annihilated so that not a single one remains, except those who are willing to trade, like all other tradesmen, without money-lending and usury."</font></font>

Yaakov2,

I would like to punctuate what Pilgrim just said, these are phonies who are not Christian whatsoever. They mis-represent Christ and the world sees it as a big black eye for Christianity and true Christianity gets persecuted for it. These murderers will have greater judgement heaped upon them than common murderers because they mis-represent [murder] God. A true Christian is someone who has their heart converted. An outward show and an outward statement don't necessarily make someone a Christian. After all this time you have been on FactNet, don't you understand that yet?

--Alan.

[yaakov2]

Wyoming

When I see names like Pope Innocent III, The Fourth Lateran Council, The Synod of Narbonne, Pope Innocent IV, and Pope Gregory, they are all too Christian to me.

All this time on Factnet, why do you refuse to understand the persecution that the Christian church inflicted on others throughout it's history?

[wyoming]

.

<font size="+2">Wrong!</font> Those b - - - - - - s are not Christian!

[ba2]

yaakov,
I’m with you on this. The popes and the other leaders of that era you mentioned although misguided, certainly were Christian, just like so many of the misguided Christians of today. According to some who post here, believing and accepting Jesus as our savior is not enough to make one a Christian.

The on line dictionary gives two slightly different definitions when used as a noun.
1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.

Stating that someone was not Christian because they didn’t behave exactly as one thinks a Christian should act, does not make it true. For the last few thousand years there have been good Christians and there have been bad Christians. I would think it is the same for all religions and people in all cultures.

[trainedobserver]

"Wrong! Those b - - - - - - s are not Christian!"


It is ridiculous for you to consider yourself the arbiter of Christianity. What a "Christian" is has not been trademarked that I know of. You have no more claim to "real" Christianity than anyone else. In a 'practice' that is supposed to produce humility an incredible arrogance often is displayed in the insistence that they are the official representatives of the 'god of the universe.'

[yaakov2]

ba2

I never said that all Christians are bad. The link that I provided lists Christian persecutions. I wouldn’t expect to see any good Christians on this list of historical events.

The link that I pasted leads to a list of Christian prosecution from the year 1200 to 1800. “That era” as you say, was just a small sample that I pasted from there. Other pages on that website list other pages of Christian prosecution from inception to the present day.

It’s frustrating to me that although Christianity has a long and well documented history of religious persecution, that people like Wyoming want to whitewash and ignore history with a simple statement of “They weren’t REAL Christians.” It is a common pastime for Christians to accuse other Christians of not being true Christians. For me, Popes, synods, and founders are all very Christian.

[ba2]

Yaakov, hi again,
You said, <font color="0000ff">“I never said that all Christians are bad.”</font> Yes I know you didn’t, although I was responding to you, that reference wasn’t meant for you.

You also said, <font color="0000ff">“It is a common pastime for Christians to accuse other Christians of not being true Christians.”</font> How true that is. And it is very frustrating to me too. As a Christian, it eally drives me nuts.

You finally said, <font color="0000ff">“For me, Popes, synods, and founders are all very Christian.”</font> Yes, me too, and I would add the likes of Hitler as well.

I appreciate your calm attitude in the face of such insanity.

[wyoming]

<font size="-2"><font color="0077aa">1. One who professes belief in Jesus as Christ or follows the religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus.
2. One who lives according to the teachings of Jesus.</font></font>

Non-Christians don't understand this. By these definitions, those b - - - - - - s may profess with their mouth, but by their actions they disqualify themselves. The political opportunism of Constantine produced a bastardized form of Christianity that was unprecedented and has very little similarity with what Jesus taught and how he conducted himself. They put over a big lie by dressing it up with some truth. That's what man-made cults do! Christ and the Bible are the standard for Christianity. Anyone who has a fair knowledge the Bible, from Christ onward, can can use it as a magnifying glass to examine whether those who profess to be Christian are really blasphemers. Christ and the Bible are the judge. I did not create the standard. The Bible shows where these phoney religious people are condemned, Luke 13:27, in context of some religious people who say the follow Jesus, "depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity." Matthew 7:22-23, "Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."

Your problem is not with me because I don't set the standard. Your problem is with the Lord Jesus Christ and the Bible. Why do such dishonest debaters and spoilers like to play dirty pool and posture Christians as being judgemental just because we agree with God's judgement as revealed in His Bible. We are not the judge! Why do you play the role of anti-Christ? How far will you go to try to silence us? Sow seeds of discord every day on FactNet?

[ba2]

wyoming,
You asked, <font color="0000ff">"Why do such dishonest debaters and spoilers like to play dirty pool and posture Christians as being judgemental just because we agree with God's judgement as revealed in His Bible. We are not the judge!”
</font>But you are judging. You are claiming to understand every word written in the bible, and if someone doesn’t agree with your interpretation, you say they are not Christian and condemn them to hell. You think the written word in English is perfect, even though it is an interpretation of an interpretation and written by man’s hand. You hold up the bible and claim absolute inerrancy, again, even though it was interpreted and physically written by man’s hand. I say it is impossible to literally interpret any two languages but somehow you claim your version does.

You go on to say, <font color="0000ff">“Your problem is not with me because I don't set the standard. Your problem is with the Lord Jesus Christ and the Bible.”</font> Again you have it wrong. Although I regularly read the entire Bible, I focus on the red letters. I interpret most everything through what is said in the red letters. The trick is figuring out what parts of the bible are historic vs prescriptive and also figuring out what parts are corrupted. There are many ways to intrepret scripture but the only constant is the law of love.

All the gospels are clear about the law of love.
Matt 22:39-40 <font color="119911">love your neighbor as yourself. On the law of love hang all the law and the prophets. </font>
Mark 12:31 <font color="119911">says the same thing, love your neighbor as yourself. </font>
Luke 10:27 <font color="119911">love thy neighbor as thyself</font>
John: 15:12 <font color="119911">This is my commandment, That ye love one another.</font>

And Paul really hits it home in Galatians 5:14 <font color="119911">“For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.”</font>

Jesus was very clear about man being judge. When you judge, you create a law for yourself. In Matthew 7:1-2 <font color="119911">Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.</font> So you better not have ever, ever done those things which you are complaining about. However, you can judge unrighteous judgment as stated in John 7:24 <font color="119911">Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment.</font>

You also said, <font color="0000ff">“…By these definitions, those b - - - - - - s may profess with their mouth, but by their actions they disqualify themselves…”</font> If that isn’t judging, I don’t know what is???

[wyoming]

.
Alibis! They are judged by the Bible, not by me. There are no dubious interpretations with regard to the subject we are dealing with, no matter what translation you use. You just want to argue your new age, replacment theology, picking and choosing what you want to believe based upon your own criteria. Are you not guilty of what you are accusing me of?

(Message edited by Wyoming on February 02, 2007)

[ba2]

The bible is a book, it does not judge. but nice difflection from the tough issue.

[wyoming]

It's a very simple and a well settled issue to us believers.

Since you are a non-believer, this is the answer I would expect from you. To the unbeliever, it is a dead letter. It's like you are reading other people's mail and not understanding it.

But I wouldn't expect you to be so ignorant as to not understand that law books pass judgement. Many books and position papers make profound statements and set up criteria for judgement. Have you ever heard of testing and measurement?

The only valid thing you can tell us is that you don't believe. Please don't pretend to know anything about Christianity. You are not one of us and don't have the same point of reference that we have. When you try to make a mockery of Christ, you make a mockery of yourself. I hope you become a Christian someday so that you will know what you are talking about; and I would be proud to call you brother.

[soul1958]

Wyoming,
You have me kind of confused here now on your position about the death penalty...
“Christ and the Bible are the judge.”
“They are judged by the Bible, not by me.”
“law books pass judgement”

I suspect you would include some Hebrew Scriptures, i.e., Old Testament books, as part of the Christian bible.

How does your “brand” of Christianity deal with the OT books of law? That is to say, how do you reconcile the judgment of the old law, “eye for an eye,” with the new law, mercy and forgiveness?

I’m trying to extrapolate what you are saying about judgments with how humans are suppose to implement those laws on earth.

[soul1958]

Catholic Man
"But of those who are for capital punishment, what about the methods used?"

I think I would choose lethal injection.

I say this only because it is what is used on animals/pets, and we consider it humane enough for them....http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/wink.gif

But really, biblically, do we <u>need</u> to keep with stoning? How much and when can we deviate from God's word?

(Message edited by soul1958 on February 05, 2007)

[pilgrim]

soul1958,

Read the book of Acts in the New Testament. Stoning was never practised by New Testament Christians.
Some Christians in the New Testament were stoned by unbelievers and non christians religious people but they never stone anyone.

Capital punishment was never practised by New Testament Christians.

[ba2]

wyoming,
Unless, you mean that I don't believe in the same manner as you, you will not find one post anywhere that would suggest in any way that I am a non-believer. If you knew me personally, I doubt that you would find any of my behaviors being anti-Christian either. I read the bible daily but I don’t believe it was ever meant to be read literally. On that point we have to agree to disagree or we cannot ever have a discussion concerning scripture.

You said, <font color="0000ff">“You are not one of us and don't have the same point of reference that we have.” </font> I am Christian but apparently not one like you. That is absolutely true. But the bible is a book; it contains God’s word but is physically written by man’s hand in terms man was able to comprehend thousands of years ago. If it were written today, the basic message would be the same, but the words would be very different. The book does not judge, it contains the message as to how we will be judged. I do not idolize a book, I do not put the book at an equal or higher level than God himself and I try very much not to judge what is in another’s heart. Sometimes I fail.

You also said, <font color="0000ff">“I hope you become a Christian someday so that you will know what you are talking about; and I would be proud to call you brother.”</font> I understand very well what you are talking about; I hear your message every week in church. I listen to it, but I will never fall into the trap of what I consider cult thinking.

Considering the topic of this thread, I tend to be against capital punishment. In a perfect world where we could be absolutely sure of the guilt, I might change my mind. Then again, in a perfect world, we wouldn’t even need to consider it, would we? We know that eye witnesses are not very good and DNA evidence, although strong, is not perfect, so I think we have to be very careful. Violence begets violence, that is for sure. And, revenge begets revenge. In a free society, capital punishment does nothing to deter capital offences. So one would wonder why do it?

[bluewater2]

The idea of capital punishment is one of those issues that is more acceptable or less acceptable as society evolves. What is sad is that the type of christianity that I see promoted here, with the exception of the more balanced ones like BA2, leave no room for growth as society grows. It is obvious to those that pay attention to world attitudes that captital punishment is no longer a good deterant and does nothing to further the "culture of life" that the xtian bunch likes to claim to promote with their antiquated views on abortion as well.

[wyoming]

soul1958

I was not referring to capital punishment.

ba2

I was originally responding to Yaakov. Your statements to me about being judgemental didn't come across very well, and your <font color="0000ff">"The bible is a book, it does not judge. but nice difflection from the tough issue."</font> maligned you with me because the Bible [not the paper and the ink] is the Word of God. They sounded like attacks on Christian fundamentals. I'll have to take you at your word that you are a Christian. Therefore, I apologise for assuming that you were not a Christian.

[bluewater2]

I don't think that endorsing capital punishment is a christian fundamental. Do you?

[ba2]

wyoming
I certainly accept your apology. I jumped in because you made the statement that a book makes judgment, which in my way of thinking is a ridiculous concept. We are on two totally different planes here and I’m sure will never agree. It takes a thinking mind to make a judgment so, I ask, how could a piece of paper judge? People (judges) are to judge man via made laws by interpreting man’s written laws. We can ponder on how God will judge by interpreting what is said in the scripture. But God did not physically write it down, if he did, it would be much clearer and obvious than it is. People wrote it down and people are prone to error, especially when they are trying to interpret a dead language from thousands of years ago. Yes, I think anyone who believes that anything written in a book is perfect, inerrant and to be literally interpreted even though it is written in metaphors, idioms, similes and parables is falsely idolizing that book. They place it at or above God and often miss the entire point of what is written. Paul said, “prove all things” and that includes how we intrepret scripture.

Blue,
I can find no evidence whatsoever that the early first century Christians condoned capital punishment. Jesus himself said, <font color="119911">“He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her”</font> (John 8:7). Apparently, this was the methodology of the day for capital punishment. No one threw a stone. Even Jesus, who was the only one without sin did not cast a stone. What does that tell us?

[rachelengland]

“He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her” (John 8:7). Apparently, this was the methodology of the day for capital punishment. No one threw a stone. Even Jesus, who was the only one without sin did not cast a stone. What does that tell us"?


Very beautifully stated Ba2!

[bluewater2]

"Even Jesus, who was the only one without sin did not cast a stone. What does that tell us?" It tells me that the right wing christian community that supports capital punishment are a bunch of hypocrates and war mongers.

[yaakov2]

Ba2

<font color="0000ff">Apparently, this was the methodology of the day for capital punishment. No one threw a stone.</font>

You are correct. Stoning as described in Talmud is nothing like it is described today. Capital punishment, although existing in the Law, wasn’t used very much. There were so many hoops to jump through, that hardly anyone was executed. Talmud says that a court that executed more than one person every seven years was considered a blood-thirsty court.

Stoning was only for certain types of capital offenses. The actual process was to push the guilty person off a cliff onto a stony surface. If the person survived the fall, then the “executioner” would lift one heavy stone and drop it directly onto the person’s head. The fanciful descriptions of crowds of people throwing stones have nothing to do with Law of Judaism.

[wyoming]

ba2,

So how many pages do you tear out of the Bible and how many do you keep?

[bluewater2]

I tear out every page of the bible that is in the new testament and all of the pages of the old testament that is different than the pages in the Jewish Bible.

[franklin]

Get real! You're a self proclaimed atheist!!!!!!

You tear out ALL pages of the Bible. Christian or Jewish!

[bluewater2]

No, I would not tear out the pages of the Jewish bible, atheist or not. I respect that book. The xtian version of the Jewish Bible is re-written and altered. And the new testament . . . well, I see no reason for that one at all. And without the re-written Jewish Bible, it would be more easily recognized for what it is: fiction.

Even atheists can appreciate great historical fiction, which the Jewish Bible is.

[franklin]

"And the new testament . . . well, I see no reason for that one at all."

Of course you wouldn't wormfood. You have no soul!

You are just as repulsive and blasphemous to the Jews as you are to the Christians.

Don't bother with a further explanation. Save it for when you meet God. And YOU WILL!

[bluewater2]

You are such a negative individual. Why did you find it necessary to call me worm food? It is such a lousy thing to call someone.

[franklin]

"I tear out every page of the bible that is in the new testament and all of the pages of the old testament"

And I am the negative individual?????


Either you are an eternal soul or http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/uhoh.gif you are wormfood.

Hey, it's you that is making the choice.

I've made mine. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

[bluewater2]

When I said I would tear the pages out of the new testament, I was responding to a question. You are namecalling, like usual. Whether you like it or not, you are wormfood as well. Unless of course, you think that when someone gets buried that their physical bodies rise up to heaven as well. We are all aware of the decisions you make.

[franklin]

The topic here is capital punishment. Responding to a question or not you are going way off topic and are just here to bash Christianity and cause the most offense possible to Christians as usual.

We are not our bodies. We are eternal spirits. Souls. The body is just a shell housing the soul. A casing.

I am very proud of the decisions I make. http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

Back on topic. As stated above I am against capital punishment. There is nothing in New Testament scripture that supports capital punishment.

[ba2]

wyoming
you asked, <font color="0000ff">“So how many pages do you tear out of the Bible and how many do you keep?”</font> What on earth is that suppose to mean. I read it all, but I read it logically and with common sense. I also consider prevailing science when I am trying to figure out the metaphors. When I quoted Paul, <font color="119911">“Prove all things”</font> I added that interpretation is what we had to prove.

How can you deny that the bible was physically written by fallible men? How do you reconcile that since humans physically wrote the scripture, it is possible for errors to be present? How do you reconcile that there are so many different versions of the bible with subtle but important differences? How do you reconcile that it is virtually impossible to translate two languages perfectly, and truly impossible when one of those languages has not been used for thousands of years?

I don’t expect you to try to address these tough questions posed to you, you never even addressed the question on this thread, but you did jump in with some comments about knowing who was Christian and who was not. So, how do you feel about capital punishment?

[wyoming]

Rightly dividing the scriptures is something of a science but it requires the Holy Spirit in you [if you have a good relationship with the Holy Spirit] to discern what the Holy Spirit is teaching you. At that stage, it is not rocket science. It is human frailty and lack of faith that causes us to dispute over scripture and form denominations and schools of thought.

Further above, you are emphasizing a worse case scenario of language, metaphors, translations, etc. That is a poor testimony before the several non-Christians on FactNet.

If you drop all your prejudices and get into Textural Criticism in the original languages, you will have all the evidence you need to determine that the Biblical writers that had their anointing directly from the Lord Himself, never have a single instance of disagreement in principal. If you put yourself on the same level as the apostles you have a problem. If you drag them down to your level, you have another problem. There are absolutely no contradictions in the Bible if you understand the context. The folks who claim otherwise, got their information from dis-information and never proved their negatives.

There are over 5000 ancient manuscripts in a few languages that are well understood as being able to be translated. They are all catalogued. Greek and Hebrew grammar are more precise than English and every single word has been parsed. I love it! God's divine providence set us up with the right languages. Where is your faith and assurance? Doesn't it stand to reason that <font color="aa00aa">"the hand of the Lord is not short"</font> and by the nature of God and His plan of salvation, He would make His truth perfectly transmitted? The mistakes in the handwritten work of the scribes are known to be mistakes and allowances are made. Even today, Christians all over the World who speak different languages can and do agree.

There are ignorant liberals out there who are trying to find self importance by casting dispersions and create red herrings. The simple minded and the evil contrarians fall for it. Be careful that you don't get duped among them. The concept of "interpretation" sounds sloppy to me. There is only one "truth". The liberals like to make everything sound like it is our choice. Devout Christians are more interested in God's choice and spending a lifetime trying to get it right. Man spends to much time trying to create God in man's image, rather than finding the image that God wants for us, no mater what!

I invite you to do a little reading at my web site:
http://www.churchgrowth.cc/content_Textus_Receptus.htm

--Alan.

[Murderers and rapists should be executed based upon hard evidence.]

[ba2]

With all your writing, you still tend to skirt the issue. You suggest that in order to understand <font color="0000ff">“…it requires the Holy Spirit in you…”</font> That is nothing but a copout. I hear this all the time in church, keep reading until I finally understand it the way the minister understands it. If I don’t understand like him, then I don’t have the “Holy Sprit!” What nonsense! Just as likely that he doesn’t have the “Holy Spirit!”

You won't gain knowledge by drinking ink.
Arabian Proverb

You further say, <font color="0000ff">“If you drop all your prejudices and get into Textural Criticism in the original languages, you will have all the evidence you need…”</font> That’s just it, we don’t have ANY of the original texts. None of them are in existence. All we have are copies of copies, NO ORIGINALS! These copies and translations were made by humans, and are subject to error. To suggest these humans are incapable of error is putting them into a godlike position. I won’t put these men at the same level as God.

You further say, }<font color="0000ff">Greek and Hebrew grammar are more precise than English and every single word has been parsed. I love it! God's divine providence set us up with the right languages.”</font> Even a Greek native can’t read with understanding Old Greek. Further, the only reason ancient Greek and Hebrew is considered by a few to be more precise than English is that that Old Greek and Old Hebrew are dead languages. Linguistic experts will admit that they can’t possibly understand the idioms and nuances of the day. If you called someone “gay” in 1960 it would have a completely different meaning than if you said it in 1980. But because of the volume of writing available and the fact that it is recent history, we can figure out the context, usually. This is common in any language development and since there is so little of the ancient writings still around, it is even more problematic when trying to figure out meaning. The OT is even more problematic than the NT. Much of it was created even before the Hebrew language was invented, so if Moses really wrote the first 5 books, it had to be in Egyptian picture writing. How do you interpret that with perfect accuracy?

You asked, <font color="0000ff">“Where is your faith and assurance?”</font> I have faith. I think more than most members in my independent fundamentalist church, which I regularly attend. But I certainly don’t have the same blind faith they have. I know that more than 2 Apostles wrote the gospel, so why are only 2 of the 12 in the NT? You think it is complete, I don’t. You think it has been re-written and re-translated perfectly, I don’t. I read scripture and see numerous contradictions. The stretch many go through to make it work is simply incredible and sometimes outlandish. And I see many interpretations which make no sense at all. I virtually never agree with one of the other regular posters here at factnet, but “called” is right about one thing, there have been numerous alterations done to the scripture when it was assembled by the RCC. I go a little further, there were alterations done when the verbal message in scripture was first being put down in written form.

All this being said, I believe in the message in the bible. As long as I don’t try to read literally, it pops out at me all the time, and it is very consistent.

[wyoming]

ba2,

You seem to spend more effort discrediting the Bible than promoting it. If you find the Bible to be so flawed, how can you find any security in it. You have to resort to floundering without assurance, setting yourself up as the final authority replacing the Bible. What a terrifying place to be!

You are trying to posture me in generalities you have formulated in your own mind. I am not involved in organized religion even as much as you are.

There is a lot you say that you do not appear to have proved for yourself but have taken as fact based upon what you here from the naysayers that supports your spirit.

God's Word and The Church survive in spite of what men do, and man is a poor point of reference to prove or disprove God's truth, whether he be your preacher, pope, RCC, or Johnny. If you wrote the scriptures on your heart and made them your own, taking the context into account -- are the scriptures talking to believers, non-believers, our old man, our new man, Jews, or Gentiles, etc., and comparing scripture with scripture, you would know for yourself that there are absolutely no contradictions in the Bible. What you are doing now is showing your ignorance.

I'll just have to let you stew for a while.

[franklin]

Seems silly to argue about the complete accuracy of the Bible. When actually the words are meant as a trigger for the Holy Spirit to dwell within us. Teaching us, guiding us, revealing to us God's true word. In a spiritual language incomprehensible to our fleshly ears.

From God to our soul via the Holy Spirit.

The words of the bible are just the trigger. Not the bullet.

It is no more than what is revealed to us as individuals. Doesn't matter how others interpret it. We all bring our own individual baggage and prejudices to the table when we read the Bible.

But with the Holy Spirit guiding us if we open our hearts to God then better understandings will come in time. Different levels of meanings. On a spiritual level. Eventually our baggage, our prejudices, our pride will be washed away.

The Bible is the the true source of all love, wisdom and knowledge. A higher learning not taught in school or college. Read it all your life and never understand it all. The true source, the Bible, it tells it all! http://www.factnet.org/discus/clipart/happy.gif

[yaakov2]

ba2

It sounds like you are able to see the problems, at least you are asking the right questions. On Jewish sites, people are always discussing the precise meanings of the text. And that is by people that speak Hebrew as their native language. Even the Septaugint was known to be a lousy translation in its day. It continues to amaze me that a translation of a translation of a translation is held up as a model of inerrancy.

[ba2]

wyoming
I assure you, I am not “stewing” over this. I have learned to accept the beliefs of others, as long as they are not directly hurting anyone, no matter how outlandish I think they are. But I will discuss issues from time to time.

You asked, <font color="0000ff">“If you find the Bible to be so flawed, how can you find any security in it”</font> I do find security, but not in the literal sense that you do. For example, pick up any history book or encyclopedia and you can find mistakes and contradictions. That does not mean the “real” story is not present and it doesn’t mean there won’t be valuable information. You read with the understanding that the writer has some bias and sometimes will change the text to suit their personal beliefs. This happens all the time. I read the bible and the message of love pops out clearly and consistently. Jesus told his Apostles to go out and teach what he taught. Somehow the fundamentalists found something else and push as law things that are not scripturally required.

You say, <font color="0000ff">“…there are absolutely no contradictions in the Bible”</font> This to me is pretty laughable. There are hundreds. In the OT, God commanded that “Thou shalt not kill” yet, supposedly he also commanded to kill all in an opposing tribe, including the innocent children! In the NT, two gospels two different genealogies. Now in both examples, the literalists go to great lengths to explain the contradictions, but this topic has already discussed in a different thread.

You can call me ignorant and certainly, you could be right. But I will not put a man written book at the same level as God, no matter what someone tells me.

[ba2]

yaakov,
Yes, the Jewish sights I have been to seem to be much more open to discussion. Reminds me of a local church motto: in essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things love. A rabbi once told me, other than the essential core beliefs, I should not be concerned how others interpret scripture. What are the core beliefs? According to him, there really were very few. For example, we were created, but how it happened or how long it took is not an essential belief. He also told me that there is nothing wrong with questioning our faith and especially our interpretation. In the end, the truth will prevail and we will be stronger for it.

[yaakov2]

ba2

I agree with that rabbi's statements. In synagogue, we discuss the text, move it around, apply it this way, apply it that way, find meanings in new ways. You state your case and discuss it. I've yet to have someone tell me that I was wrong, usually someone says that I had an unusual interpretation.

Core belief? To me, the only core belief of Judaism is that G-d is Eternal, Unique, and Infinite. I went searching around and I like how Wikipedia describes our core belief: <blockquote><hr size=0><!-quote-!><font size=1>quote:</font>

In all its variations, Judaism has remained tightly bound to a number of principles of faith, the most important of which is the belief that there is a single, omniscient, omnipotent, omnibenevolent, transcendent G-d, who created the universe and continues to be involved in its governance. According to traditional Jewish belief, the G-d who created the world established a covenant with the Jewish people, and revealed his laws and commandments to them in the form of the Torah. The practice of Judaism is devoted to the study and observance of these laws and commandments, as written in the Torah.<!-/quote-!><hr size=0></blockquote>