On the Death Penalty

And doesn't Jesus say not eye for eye but turn the other cheek?  I am absolutely opposed to the death penalty because I know that there have been innocent people murdered by the state. 

As a Christian, I also believe that no one is beyond redemption.  "Vengence is mine saith the Lord."  I believe they will have to face a higher justice at some point.  

I don't think murderers should be out in society where they can harm other people but I think the death penalty is completely and totally wrong. 

Yes, but the state is not an individual. Should we let a killer kill more innocents, or has he not forfeited his rights?

They can be redeemed, yes, but then should not they be willing to pay for their sins?

So you say we pay for their healthcare and food on our dime when it could be spent to help the innocent?

No, a killer should go to prison and lose his ability to hurt other people but not be murdered.



Absolutely, yes. We should not starve or medically neglect prisoners.

So do you believe two wrongs make a right in all cases or just this issue?

Murder is when you kill somebody in cold blood, it's different when they, themselves, are killers.

I never said we should, did I?

I never believe two wrongs make a right.

 

Erathoniel writes:

There is no contradiction between the Old Testament and the New Testament on executing murderers and there is no contradiction between St. Matthew 5:38-48 and the application of civil law to criminals.

Our Lord had two momentous occasions to denounce the death penalty - when Pilate condemned Him to death and as He died on the Cross. Our Lord did not do so. In St. John 19:10-11, Jesus acknowledges that capital punishment is licit. When Pilate asked him, "Don't you know I have the power to crucify You?" Jesus answered, "You would not have such power against me unless it were given to thee from above." In other words, Pilate's power to crucify was from God. The death penalty is therefore sanctioned by God.   

Where is the justice in this?

I agree Locamama but only to a certain degree. We should provide basic medical attention, that's all. This business of our paying for things like sex changes, etc. is asinine.

Not existing ones, mind you. I find that a life sentence would be far worse than a death sentence. It's a death sentence that lasts your entire lifetime.

Of course. We have to feed and clothe and medicate all prisoners, but not do everything they want. They're in prison, not a nursing home.

So what about the time when Jesus prevented a prostitute from being stoned to death? By all rights and according to the law of the day that crowd was legally entitled to kill her. Also, Jesus prevented his followers from using violence to defend him. Therefore, applying your same logic to the situation we should all also be complete pacifists who should not defend ourselves. Pilate, according to the law of the day, was legally entitled to kill Jesus but that does not mean that God sanctions capital punishment!

Stating that Jesus was ok with being killed as a heavenly acceptance of capital punishment is absolutely ridiculous.

And the so-called "god" of the old testament? As Richard Dawkins says:

"is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction; jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sado-masochistic, capriciously malevolent bully"

And I agree.

Did he not ask who among the crowd was innocent, rather than condemning the death penalty?



So Jesus does not like violence, what about it? Also, Jesus was more than perfectly capable of defending himself, if He had wanted to.



What does that have to do with ANYTHING we have been discussing?

Richard Dawkins can hardly be considered a theologian or a neutral observer. You seem to be fond of these "neutral observers" like Nietzsche. If people had faith in God, Richie over there wouldn't have a job.

Artysim,

Read again Christ's answer to Pilate's question. it does mean that God sanctions capital punishment.

Here's the actual passage:
St.John 19:10-11,

"Pilate therefore said to Him,"You will not speak to me? Do you not know I have the power (authority) to release you and power to cricify you?" Jesus answered him, "You would have no authority over Me, unless it had been given you from above;.."

Christ has told Pilate that all authority on earth comes from His Father (God).

This means in the last analysis even if people talk about the authority of a state or a nation, such authority is never absolute; It is only relative, being subject to the absolute authority or sovereignty of God. No human law can be just and therefore binding in conscience, if it does not accord with Divine Law.

Christ was clearly telling Pilate that his authority to pronounce the death penalty by crucifixion was from God the Father.

You'll get a better idea that God is the source of all authority by reading Romans 13:1, "Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God and the authorities that exist are appointed by God."

The three spheres of delegated authority in human society established by God are the family, the Church, and civil government. So this is obviouosly a divine truth that God formed civil government by the delegation of His own authority, therefore the authority contained in civil government is God's authority. Christ said Pilate had the authority to crucify HIm given from God Himself. Here, there is no other way to understand this other than God sanctions the death penalty.

Read on to Romans 13:3, "For rulers are not a terror to good works, but a terror to evil..."

I think the death penalty justly meted out is a terror to evil.

I try to answer this in my last comment.

Ah, thanks.

So do you think that some evil regimes that force abortions (China), commit genocide (Rwanda), murder, rape and torch villages (Sudan) etc. are in authority from God?

No.

As far as I know these are cruel, sadistic , atheistic regimes and misuse of authority.

Let me restate...for this goes to what I mean when I said, in the last analysis even if people talk about the authority of a state or a nation, such authority is never absolute; It is only relative, being subject to the absolute authority or sovereignty of God.

It's the authority itself that comes from God and such authority is not absolute authority since it is delegated to humans who are capable of misusing it (and therefore the power of God is not behind it.) Each user is accountable to God for his administration of the authority he holds and he's going to be held to a higher standard than the person who holds none..."to whom much is given, much is required". St.luke 12:48.

The one who is entrusted with that authority exercises it in a manner God intened, the authority has full weight and power of God behind it. To oppose it is to oppose God. Read on in Romans and it explains it.

Quoted for truth.

I'm with Loca.  Who's to say that someone's heart can't be changed?

Take, for instance, Jeffrey Dahmer, you know, the human lunch meat guy?  I watched an interview he did before he was killed in prison, and I ended up in tears.  He did HEINOUS things during his life.  But at the end of his life he professed to be a Christian. 

My cousin is also a murderer.  He spent over ten years in prison.  He went in a hateful, spiteful young man, and came out one of the most peaceful people I've ever met.  He totally screwed up, and he screwed up the life of a family forever.  He's different now, though.  When he got out, he actually wanted to go to school to be a minister, although that was out of the realm of financial possibility for him.  He's married and has a wife and a daughter now.  I can't imagine what would have happened had our state been one that supported the death penalty.  Ick.

My uncle also stole $14 million, which he used to pay for two years of my college education.  When you steal that amount of money, it's bound to catch up with you, and of course, he got caught, and was sent to prison for four years.  He missed his daughter's wedding, and the birth of his first two grandchildren.  But while he was in prison, he helped several former drug dealers earn their GED's, learn skills, and he lead Bible studies on a regular basis.  He screwed up, but good can come from evil.

Jesus says that we should forgive an infinite amount of times.  Seventy times seven?  Something like that?  I'm a sinner, too.  Sin is sin.  I don't think God sits up there with an EZ-Grader measuring our sin.  We all fall short of the glory of God, whether we're murderers, embezzlers, or we speed in our cars.  And HE is capable of forgiving anything.

I'm not saying that people cannot reform, merely that they have to pay for their sins.

MarcieMoo,

You bring up an excellent point, that good (some murderers do repent)can come from the death penalty and serving the prison time for the crime.

The courts if they are just will rightly condemn to death those mass murderers like Dahmer who will always, no matter what, be a menace to society. Those same just courts will rightly punish those other murderers who like you described of your uncle by having them do the time for their crime. For many, the common experience a conversion...but historically, nothing is more likely to provoke repentence of hardened criminals than imminent execution.

Take Dismas, the repentant thief on the cross next to Jesus. Scripture tells us that he recognized the Roman authorities right to mete out his due of his actions, but before he died, he was moved to faith in Christ. His conversion was so complete Christ told him he would enter into Paradise.

Please don't get me wrong, I'm certainly not advocating that every person who is found guilty of murder should get the death penalty...no, far from it. The State ought not to go to the extreme of executing offenders except in cases of absolute necessity when it would not be possible otherwise to defend society. Added to Dahmer, I'm thinking Ted Bundy type cases.

Our understanding of the death penalty has been wrested out of its proper context...liberals want to abolish it, but look around, at the ever increasing violence...this is no time to deprive society of the means of self-defense and that's exactly what the death penalty, rightly meted out, that is.

Bingo! We all must pay for our sins either in this world or the next. In this case, the death penalty serves as expiation for sin in one whose grave crime has caused him to lose the right to life by the state.

I've always understood this as from a teaching of Pope Pius XII, "Even when it is a question of someone dendemned to death, the state does not dispose of an individual's right to lie. It is then the task of public authority to deprive the condemned man of the good of life, in expiation of his fault, after he has already deprived himself of the right to life by his crime."

I don't believe in Capital Punishment cause to me it's simply an easy way out to getting punished. Sure, most people would not chose to die rather than jail time. But once you are dead (except for the afterlife) that person no longer suffers the punishment that person deserved in this reality. Kinda like a slap in the wrist except it would be the last one.

But then incarceration does not seem to be what it should be now a days. Outdoors freedom seems to be the only thing a person loses when in jail. They still get 3 meals a day, medical attention, TV, sports & exercise, family visits (even private moments with the wife or girlfriend at times). Education is a choice not a requirement. It doesn't seem like a punishment to me while in jail. Too many perks for someone being punished. I thought jail was meant as a deterrent, not a vacation.

That should be "I beleive" since it has yet to be proved that any innocent person was put to death (at least not in the US in the last 30 years - since it was revamped).

But the rest I do agree with you. Besides, it is not an issue with "innocent or guilty" but the "right" to take a life.

OK, I am reading way to much contradiction on this article and Loca is right to ask the above question.

Lula says:



But then Artysim said:



then Lula says:



But previously, Lula had said this:



Which is basically where Loca's question came from, but the Lula decided to explain what she meant when she said:



Now I don't know about you guys/gals, but this here is contradiction to the 10th power.

I think people tend to interpret Gods word based on the current situation and their feelings and not as a whole. And this is why so much contradiction arises from everyones own interpretation of what they believe is Gods word.

CHarlesSC posts:

Of this, Erathoniel laid this question to rest when he said:



In the rest, perhaps I wasn't clear in making my point, nevertheless, it's consistent.

Christ told Pilate (the civil authority) that he got his authority to dole out the death penalty from God. Romans 13 goes on to clarify that. Have you read it for it's only a few verses?

Scripture is meant for all times and ages and will be that way until the end of the world.



I can only answer for myself, and as far as interpreting Scripture, I do my best to only go by what the Church teaches and never on my feelings. I'm still very much a student when it comes to learning Scripture.

As far as our understanding of the death penalty, we certainly can apply our current situations to Scripture.

I quote the answer:

It has nothing to do with the death penalty. There must be a consequence for killing.