Does God Play a Role in the DP?

[The R]

I know this topic of the DP is debatable enough already, but I wanted to ask the readers here their opinions or feelings on a couple questions. I'd be most interested in hearing the opinions of people from places the DP is practiced but obviously all are welcome!

Most know that the eye-for-an-eye system of punishment has been around since the time of Hammurabi.....my question is this: Does God (or a supreme creator) play a role in the DP? If we base our belief of the DP on religious tenants, does it mean that the precepts in the Bible, etc. aren't valid? For instance, the Bible tells us that God pledges vengence, for us not to take part. Does that say something about the faith of those who believe what the Bible says but then support the DP also?

I don't intend to inflame with this question but am genuinely interested in how others may answer or view this.

Thanks and ALLMO,
R

[Jayy]

Since there is no God the answer is no.

[drola3]

I know this topic of the DP is debatable enough already, but I wanted to ask the readers here their opinions or feelings on a couple questions. I'd be most interested in hearing the opinions of people from places the DP is practiced but obviously all are welcome!

Most know that the eye-for-an-eye system of punishment has been around since the time of Hammurabi.....my question is this: Does God (or a supreme creator) play a role in the DP? If we base our belief of the DP on religious tenants, does it mean that the precepts in the Bible, etc. aren't valid? For instance, the Bible tells us that God pledges vengence, for us not to take part. Does that say something about the faith of those who believe what the Bible says but then support the DP also?

I don't intend to inflame with this question but am genuinely interested in how others may answer or view this.

Thanks and ALLMO,
R

Good question. My pro-DP stance isn't one based on God, or anything that I've read in the Bible. I believe that it is necessary for the safety of our society. To me, it is society's way of saying "we will not tolerate cold-blooded murder". It has nothing to do with God.

[beaky]

I think god plays a part if you believe in god...

The DP is kind of like people washing their hands of another person ..but leaving their soul for god to sort out...Like they are only killing the body not the complete person..

Aren't western societys laws based on christian beliefs..then the ten commandments apply ..

I don't know the bible...but does god mention any form of penalty for breaking or not conforming to his laws..?

[WarmNCozy]

No, I don't believe God plays a part in the DP any more than he plays a part in war.

The 911 terrorists were praying to God as they smashed those planes into the Towers.

The allies were praying to God against the Germans who were also praying to God.

God leaves us to our own devices. When judgment comes, we will certainly find out if we were right or wrong in our choices!

[Luke Davis]

No, I don't believe God plays a part in the DP any more than he plays a part in war.

The 911 terrorists were praying to God as they smashed those planes into the Towers.

The allies were praying to God against the Germans who were also praying to God.

God leaves us to our own devices. When judgment comes, we will certainly find out if we were right or wrong in our choices!

That sounds right to me.

[accordn2me]

............

I don't know the bible...but does god mention any form of penalty for breaking or not conforming to his laws..?For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.

[beaky]

Thats interesting...does it say what a sin actually is...are there different levels of sin...can you do a sin against other people or only do one against god ??I haven't got a bible...but I was wondering if the laws of people are different in importance to the laws of god...

I'll stop now ..This is getting too theological..

Almost forgot...that point about the war and 9/11..man has free will..doesn't he...so he is free to highjack gods name and use it to further his own ends....with god on your side you can't lose...so everyone says god is on their side...JMO

[accordn2me]

Thats interesting...does it say what a sin actually is...are there different levels of sin...can you do a sin against other people or only do one against god ??I haven't got a bible...but I was wondering if the laws of people are different in importance to the laws of god...

I'll stop now ..This is getting too theological..

Almost forgot...that point about the war and 9/11..man has free will..doesn't he...so he is free to highjack gods name and use it to further his own ends....with god on your side you can't lose...so everyone says god is on their side...JMOYou should get a Bible. Interesting reading. I would suggest one that has multiple translations, such as the Amplified Bible or a good study bible. However, the internet has most anything you'd like to know. Here's just one good page on sin:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sin

I'm glad you asked the question. I learned a lot from reading the wikipedia page, for instance, the Major 70 Sins in Islam. So, ask away....we make need to start a new thread though.

[beaky]

Some great reading there...thanks..

Bibles that I have seen are all written in a strange way...I might look for one that has some sort of explanation to go along with the wording.

I am going to do some reading up....Interesting that with adam and eve they start by breaking the rules ....was the writter saying something about human nature there.

[accordn2me]

Some great reading there...thanks..

Bibles that I have seen are all written in a strange way...I might look for one that has some sort of explanation to go along with the wording.

I am going to do some reading up....Interesting that with adam and eve they start by breaking the rules ....was the writter saying something about human nature there.
IDK, but when I opened my home page, refdesk.com, and read the thought of the day, I thought of this thread. I don't remember reading anything about the Seven Deadly sins on the link. Were they on there?

"The avenues in my neighborhood are Pride, Covetousness and Lust; the cross streets are Anger, Gluttony, Envy and Sloth. I live over on Sloth, and the style on our street is to avoid the other thoroughfares." - John Chancellor

ETA: You won't find them in a list form (like the 10 commandments) in the Bible.

[beaky]

Accordn2me...

The 7 sins are on a see also section...I liked your thought for the day...
I found this...

The origin of individual sins is defined in James 1:14&15 - "(14)but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. (15)Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."(NIV)

When you look at someone like Bundy it fits well...Little crimes first, then bolder until killings begin...

Would it be a legal defence ?.."Desire made me do it"...

But seriously ..can a criminal be guilty of something if they don't have the willpower to overide some twisted desire that they have..Like a smoker that can't quit....If they sought psychiatric help is it likely that it would be made available & within their financial means.

[accordn2me]

Accordn2me...

The 7 sins are on a see also section...I liked your thought for the day...
I found this...

The origin of individual sins is defined in James 1:14&15 - "(14)but each one is tempted when, by his own evil desire, he is dragged away and enticed. (15)Then, after desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, gives birth to death."(NIV)

When you look at someone like Bundy it fits well...Little crimes first, then bolder until killings begin...

Would it be a legal defence ?.."Desire made me do it"...

But seriously ..can a criminal be guilty of something if they don't have the willpower to overide some twisted desire that they have..Like a smoker that can't quit....If they sought psychiatric help is it likely that it would be made available & within their financial means.I love it! You are looking up sin.....and what the Bible says about it, no less! That's awesome! The New International Version is a good one (translation) for you to look at. It (the language) shouldn't seem "strange" to you. After the New International Version came out, the New Revised Standard Version came out. I believe this one was supposedly a more accurate transcription, according to academic circles, than the NIV. Since then, there is the New American Standard Bible. Read what wikipedia says about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_American_Standard_Bible

IMO, nothing is a defense. My position (more radical than most you'll encounter) is that if you commit a capital offense, you should get the death penalty....no excuses!

[accordn2me]

Then in keeping with the bible, should people's hands get lobbed off for stealing? Should people be stoned to death? If not, why not.Keeping with the Bible is just fine with me.

[accordn2me]

At least your and Muslim beliefs will have a lot in common.

PEACE to you and yours.

http://www.mindyourmind.ca/personal-stories/blog/images/dove.jpg

Thank you for the lovely peace dove. Peace be with you.

IMO, our justice system is mostly set up to punish, not deter. I wonder about the crime rate...just take stealing for instance....in societies where your hand gets chopped off if you are caught. Is it a deterrent?

[Lili007]

Back to the original question.

I have always been against the DP, even though, sometimes, I think it should be enforced. But it's like avenging a killing with another. I think people who kill should spend their life in prison, but not the old gallows or even "humane" injections of some drugs or other. I don't believe there's anything :humane" about it.

Having said that, I've watched some shows lately on CI Australia which make Scott Peterson look like a choir boy. To me, it's unbelievable what people do to each other. The thing I'm appalled about is that these monsters actually get to go out on parole. One specific example is one that I happend to tune into, today. This guy killed his wife because she got pregnant with a second baby and he didn't want it. He got so enraged that he bought a spear-gun and shot her to death with it. But that wasn't enough. A few days later he used that spear gun to shoot his toddler as well, after he put her in her crib.

I can't imagine what sort of sick and distorted minds these people have. Or why.

JMO

[Lili007]

Only as interpreted and and translated many times by people. I've long ago stopped believing the telephone game gives us the same word that we started with.


People is what makes this world what it it is. Would you like this world without "people"?

Yes, it WAS written and translated by people, that's how historical records came about. Who else would you think would do it? What about the library at Alexandria? Why did the Egyptians carve their hierogliphics, the Greeks and Romans layed the foundations for the very language we communicate with?

God gave us the power of thinking. We use it. Well, most of us do. Whether you believe it or not is your personal choice.

The telephone game has nothing to do with it whatsoever. It's a child's game, like hide and seek, like pin the tail, or whatever, and that's all it's meant to be. But I suppose it's also a way of learning language and social skills in the very early growing up period. Obviously you don't believe in that.

If you're into translating and interpreting, good for you.

I just hope you won't use children or children's stories or growing up stages to carry your message, whatever it is. Children are entitled to their childhood, wherever they come from, whatever faith they are brought up in. If they want to play games, so they very well should. Just let them be. If you can't nurture them, leave them alone. If you think their world is all "wrong" somehow, that's your opinion only. Just let them be.

JMO

[Wichita]

What a thread! Our entire human history is based on a belief in God. Sin is merely disobedience to God's will, or commandments. The original sin committed by Adam and Eve was: "But of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat; for in the day ye eat thereof, ye shalt surely die." So, the first disobedience was committed, which was passed on to all of humanity when Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden. They did not know they were naked, until they ate of the forbidden tree. They "Chose" to eat, which means we are given the freedom to choose. Even after the expulsion, there was no law until God gave it to Moses on Mt. Sinai. The rules men lived by until that time were based on the whims of the rulers of the day.

Western society's laws are based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. So are many of the eastern societies. One of the greatest stumbling blocks for some people who refuse to accept God's teachings are His condemnations of people who refuse to abide by His commandments. There are hundreds of examples of God killing those who deliberately disobeyed Him. Some people cannot accept the idea that a loving God would kill his own people, therefore, He cannot be real. In the new testament, in the book of Romans, it is written: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ, our Lord." The 13th Chapter of Romans also teaches us our responsibility to government, and government's role toward transgressors. In speaking of the powers that be, "they bear not the sword in vain."

If I steal from Beaky, I have sinned against Beaky, God, and society. I owe a debt to Beaky, God, and society. If I am never caught by society, and if I ever accept God, then I must make it right with Beaky, too. If I truly want to make it right, I would turn myself in to the authorities, and accept whatever punishment might be forthcoming. If I am caught, then I should repay Beaky, ask God to forgive me and refrain from stealing in the future. Then I must pay the price society demands for my violation of the law. If that is jail, so be it. If I lose a hand, so be it. Society sets such rules as are considered just by the rulers of the people. If we disagree with the punishments, then we change them to suit our own moral code. Many believe the DP is wrong, but a majority believe it is just. God allows us to choose, but he also holds us accountable for our choices. If we kill murderers, it is to be done by the government in accordance with the rules, not by the individual for revenge. When a murder occurs, it is not just the victim who is victimized. It is the family, friends, and the rest of the community, which reaches to the entire society. Therefore, in order for justice to be done, the murderer must be held accountable for the sake of ALL the victims, beginning with the one who was murdered, and running all the way through the rest of the community.

Whether one believes in God or not, the DP is a just punishment, morally. So is life without parole. How can anything else even be close to justice? Murderers are not to be tolerated in society, regardless of whether our law is based on the Judeo-Christian ethic. As I have said before, the DP is an act of self defense carried out by society, based on the proven behavior of the condemned, imo.

[beaky]

Great post...
My question is...If a criminal Sins against the victim...god...and society...Is this taken in to account by a court sentence...Is there a spiritual aspect to the sentence...Or is that part left to hope..

A criminal can repay or compensate a victim...(in some crimes)...Can carry out community service on probation for the society.... what about the god part ??

[WarmNCozy]

What a thread! Our entire human history is based on a belief in God. Sin is merely disobedience to God's will, or commandments. The original sin committed by Adam and Eve was: "But of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat; for in the day ye eat thereof, ye shalt surely die." So, the first disobedience was committed, which was passed on to all of humanity when Adam and Eve were expelled from the garden. They did not know they were naked, until they ate of the forbidden tree. They "Chose" to eat, which means we are given the freedom to choose. Even after the expulsion, there was no law until God gave it to Moses on Mt. Sinai. The rules men lived by until that time were based on the whims of the rulers of the day.

Western society's laws are based on Judeo-Christian beliefs. So are many of the eastern societies. One of the greatest stumbling blocks for some people who refuse to accept God's teachings are His condemnations of people who refuse to abide by His commandments. There are hundreds of examples of God killing those who deliberately disobeyed Him. Some people cannot accept the idea that a loving God would kill his own people, therefore, He cannot be real. In the new testament, in the book of Romans, it is written: "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ, our Lord." The 13th Chapter of Romans also teaches us our responsibility to government, and government's role toward transgressors. In speaking of the powers that be, "they bear not the sword in vain."

If I steal from Beaky, I have sinned against Beaky, God, and society. I owe a debt to Beaky, God, and society. If I am never caught by society, and if I ever accept God, then I must make it right with Beaky, too. If I truly want to make it right, I would turn myself in to the authorities, and accept whatever punishment might be forthcoming. If I am caught, then I should repay Beaky, ask God to forgive me and refrain from stealing in the future. Then I must pay the price society demands for my violation of the law. If that is jail, so be it. If I lose a hand, so be it. Society sets such rules as are considered just by the rulers of the people. If we disagree with the punishments, then we change them to suit our own moral code. Many believe the DP is wrong, but a majority believe it is just. God allows us to choose, but he also holds us accountable for our choices. If we kill murderers, it is to be done by the government in accordance with the rules, not by the individual for revenge. When a murder occurs, it is not just the victim who is victimized. It is the family, friends, and the rest of the community, which reaches to the entire society. Therefore, in order for justice to be done, the murderer must be held accountable for the sake of ALL the victims, beginning with the one who was murdered, and running all the way through the rest of the community.

Whether one believes in God or not, the DP is a just punishment, morally. So is life without parole. How can anything else even be close to justice? Murderers are not to be tolerated in society, regardless of whether our law is based on the Judeo-Christian ethic. As I have said before, the DP is an act of self defense carried out by society, based on the proven behavior of the condemned, imo.

This is an excellent post! I agree completely!:rose: :rose: :rose: :rose:

[Wichita]

The sentencing parameters given to the court are written by the legislature in the form of discretionary limits. For example, in my state, First Degree murder is punishable by either death, or life without parole. There are other limits for 2nd degree, etc. If the majority of the legislators ascribe to the Judeo-Christian ethic as their guideline for what is fair, then yes, the spiritual aspect of sentencing is inherent in the penalty. If not, then it is inherent in the social mores which guide them. Either way, the penalty is handed down in conformance with what the government defines as just. The legislators are elected by the people, so the people are indirectly responsible for the decisions made by the legislators who write the law. The judges are appointed by other officials of government, and therefore, the people are indirectly responsible for the decisions. This is the problem some who disagree with the DP have. If a mistake is made, they don't want to be vicariously responsible for a wrongful death, which they deem to be murder. For me, I feel responsible when a murderer or rapist is deemed fit to be released, and murders and rapes again once released. Dru Sodjn is a perfect example. It is only murder, imo, if the penalty is carried out with knowledge that the condemned is innocent, and executed anyway. If the executed is exonerated post mortem, then it is not murder if it was carried out in good faith, under due process of law from charging, to trial, to conviction, to appeal, to execution.

The "God" part is an individual choice. I am not required by law to make peace with God as a part of my sentence, which would be an establishment of religion. It is a personal choice I make that gives me peace between God and me. I do this out of a belief, through faith, that he is real and that I will some day stand before him to answer for my deeds. For the government to force a convict to convert to a particular faith would not be constitutional in our system. Other countries, however, demand conversion or death. (Islam)

Some believe that religion is best left out of the equation. Our basic foundation, the constitution, was written mostly by clergymen who practiced Christianity. That is why our rules are based on the Bible. There had to be a place to start. In today's world, many interpreters of the constitution have broken away from the Judeo-Christian ethic, and have turned to secular humanism as their guide. This is the crux of the issue between Christians, and humanists. This is where the argument that human beings don't have the right to kill another human being under any circumstances stems from. My personal belief is that our current system is like a doting parent, always forgiving too soon, and thereby enabling the "children" to re-offend, instead of seriously holding them accountable. We are allowed to choose, notwithstanding our faith, how we wish to treat criminals. But, we live by our choices. Do we allow them to rape or kill again, or put them down? I really don't think it is a religious question at all, but we look for justification. Christians can find the justification, while humanists cannot.

[Joe Public]

Witchita,
I have read some good posts before, but I believe that these last two are about the best I have read. I couldn't agree more with your point. I do not believe that the DP has or should have anything to do with God. I believe this to be a tool use by people that feel many offenders can be rehabilitated and be upstanding citizens if even from prison. I have yet to see a comdenmed prisoner that contributes so much to society that they should not be put to death.

The one thing I have always wondered during this debate in the community and nationally is where is the compassion for the victim and their family that some want for the convicted? How can they advicate letting these criminals live in prisons on our expense when the victim and their family have no justice.

Once again all just my opinion.

[Chocoholic]

Witchita,
I have read some good posts before, but I believe that these last two are about the best I have read. I couldn't agree more with your point. I do not believe that the DP has or should have anything to do with God. I believe this to be a tool use by people that feel many offenders can be rehabilitated and be upstanding citizens if even from prison. I have yet to see a comdenmed prisoner that contributes so much to society that they should not be put to death.

The one thing I have always wondered during this debate in the community and nationally is where is the compassion for the victim and their family that some want for the convicted? How can they advicate letting these criminals live in prisons on our expense when the victim and their family have no justice.

Once again all just my opinion.

The problem remains that people are wrongly convicted. Hence the question, is it morally and ethically right to put innocent people to death in order to avenge another person's crimes?

[Joe Public]

The problem remains that people are wrongly convicted. Hence the question, is it morally and ethically right to put innocent people to death in order to avenge another person's crimes?

Being convicted by a jury of your peers doesn't automatically send you to the death chamber right then. These convicts have appeals. Doesn't matter how quickly I or others think these convicts should die. The CJS has a standard set of appeals that keep these fools alive longer than their victims. Now if they happen to be innocent I would hope that they get a better lawyer to argue their appeals to set them free. If by some chance an innocent man is put to death the ONLY thing we can do as a society is to find the real killer. This isn't about seeking vengance. It's about justice. And the death penalty is also a deterant for future murderers. We give these convicts enough chance to get out of jail, personally I don't see the need for a debate.

Just my opinion.

[Wichita]

I agree that the emphasis for justice should be toward the direct victim first, then the indirect victims, such as the surviving family and friends, then toward society. I think opponents of the DP have become ensnared in a philosophical trap by arguing that the DP is revenge as opposed to justice. It is ludicrous to feel like a murderer when a murderer is euthanized ever so gently after torturing, hacking, and destroying a victim. It would be murder by the state if the evidence clearly showed reasonable doubt, and the accused was, nevertheless, put down. That is not the case, even if it is later discovered that the condemned was innocent, if due process of law was followed to the letter, and there was no evidence of a state sponsored frame.

If we are to be considered murderers as proponents of the DP, then why aren't we considered guilty when we release them and they kill again? Just for the sake of argument, I would submit that some people who are in favor of state funded abortion, are also opposed to the death penalty. What's the deal with that? It seems like catch 22. We are either vicariously guilty of murder on the one hand, or vicariously guilty of murder on the other.

If I am going to be considered guilty of murder, let it be for those convicts who were put to death, not for the victims murdered by them after we paroled the little darlings, or for unborn children executed with my tax dollars.

[accordn2me]

I agree that the emphasis for justice should be toward the direct victim first, then the indirect victims, such as the surviving family and friends, then toward society. I think opponents of the DP have become ensnared in a philosophical trap by arguing that the DP is revenge as opposed to justice. It is ludicrous to feel like a murderer when a murderer is euthanized ever so gently after torturing, hacking, and destroying a victim. It would be murder by the state if the evidence clearly showed reasonable doubt, and the accused was, nevertheless, put down. That is not the case, even if it is later discovered that the condemned was innocent, if due process of law was followed to the letter, and there was no evidence of a state sponsored frame.

If we are to be considered murderers as proponents of the DP, then why aren't we considered guilty when we release them and they kill again? Just for the sake of argument, I would submit that some people who are in favor of state funded abortion, are also opposed to the death penalty. What's the deal with that? It seems like catch 22. We are either vicariously guilty of murder on the one hand, or vicariously guilty of murder on the other.

If I am going to be considered guilty of murder, let it be for those convicts who were put to death, not for the victims murdered by them after we paroled the little darlings, or for unborn children executed with my tax dollars.AMEN!

[Chocoholic]

Being convicted by a jury of your peers doesn't automatically send you to the death chamber right then. These convicts have appeals. Doesn't matter how quickly I or others think these convicts should die. The CJS has a standard set of appeals that keep these fools alive longer than their victims. Now if they happen to be innocent I would hope that they get a better lawyer to argue their appeals to set them free. If by some chance an innocent man is put to death the ONLY thing we can do as a society is to find the real killer. This isn't about seeking vengance. It's about justice. And the death penalty is also a deterant for future murderers. We give these convicts enough chance to get out of jail, personally I don't see the need for a debate.

Just my opinion.

Facts about the DP being a deterrent appear to contradict your opinion.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=1705#stateswithvwithout

States Without the Death Penalty Have Better Record on Homicide Rates - A new survey by the New York Times found that states without the death penalty have lower homicide rates than states with the death penalty. The Times reports that ten of the twelve states without the death penalty have homicide rates below the national average, whereas half of the states with the death penalty have homicide rates above. During the last 20 years, the homicide rate in states with the death penalty has been 48% - 101% higher than in states without the death penalty. "I think Michigan made a wise decision 150 years ago," said the state's governor, John Engler, a Republican, referring to the state's abolition of the death penalty in 1846. "We're pretty proud of the fact that we don't have the death penalty." (New York Times, 9/22/00)

[Chocoholic]

I agree that the emphasis for justice should be toward the direct victim first, then the indirect victims, such as the surviving family and friends, then toward society. I think opponents of the DP have become ensnared in a philosophical trap by arguing that the DP is revenge as opposed to justice. It is ludicrous to feel like a murderer when a murderer is euthanized ever so gently after torturing, hacking, and destroying a victim. It would be murder by the state if the evidence clearly showed reasonable doubt, and the accused was, nevertheless, put down. That is not the case, even if it is later discovered that the condemned was innocent, if due process of law was followed to the letter, and there was no evidence of a state sponsored frame.

If we are to be considered murderers as proponents of the DP, then why aren't we considered guilty when we release them and they kill again? Just for the sake of argument, I would submit that some people who are in favor of state funded abortion, are also opposed to the death penalty. What's the deal with that? It seems like catch 22. We are either vicariously guilty of murder on the one hand, or vicariously guilty of murder on the other.

If I am going to be considered guilty of murder, let it be for those convicts who were put to death, not for the victims murdered by them after we paroled the little darlings, or for unborn children executed with my tax dollars.

Let's not bring abortion into the conversation which brings about a whole different set of issues. We'll save that for another board?

I have stated that IMO if we can be positive that a person is guilty of a crime, and the prison term is life, then s/he should spend life behind bars, and hopefully that person can be productive in some way shape or form. I would never want the death of an innocent person who received the death penalty on my shoulders. However, science is still fickle and DNA tests aren't perfect. What right do I have as a human being to sentence an innocent person to death based on possible incorrect information/science? Imo none! I do not have the right to make life or death decisions if that person doesn't want me to.

I'm no scholar of the bible, but doesn't it teach forgiveness? Does the bible not teach that revenge should be left to God?


Revenge

Revenge should be left in God's hands. It's in the Bible, Romans 12:19, NIV. "Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is Mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord." Proverbs 20:22, NIV. "Do not say, 'I'll pay you back for this wrong!' Wait for the Lord, and He will deliver you."

We should resist revenge in favor of love. It's in the Bible, Matthew 5:38-39, TLB. "The law of Moses says, 'If a man gouges out another's eye, he must pay with his own eye. If a tooth gets knocked out, knock out the tooth of the one who did it.' But I say: Don't resist violence! If you are slapped on one cheek, turn the other too."

Do not be happy when your enemy stumbles. It's in the Bible, Proverbs 24:17-18, NIV. "Do not gloat when your enemy falls; when he stumbles, do not let your heart rejoice, or the Lord will see and disapprove and turn his wrath away from him."


I'm no big believer of the bible, but many are. How does the DP sit with the scriptures above? Hard to compute.

[Wichita]

Go to www.deathpenaltyinfo.org for statistics on individual states. There are many other interesting articles and facts surrounding the issue of the death penalty. No offense, but the NY Times is not known for its unbiased reporting.

I visited the web page I listed above, and did some unscientific research of my own. I found it interesting that the lack of a death penalty is not a deterrent to murder, especially in Michigan. It seems that in Washington DC, with no DP, the murder rate is 29.1 per 100,000. In NY, it is 4.8, in MI, where they are proud of not having the DP, the rate is 7.1. In Texas, the state that puts more to death than any others, it is 5.9 per 100k, CA is 6.8, and FL is 6.2. So much for Michigan's pride in the lack of the DP.

Since NY is lower than TX, CA, and FL, one could spin the data to show that the DP is not a deterrent to murder. Since DC, and MI are higher than CA, TX, and FL, one could spin the data to show that the DP is a deterrent to murder.

The deterrent affect of the DP applies only to the executed. The executed criminal will never commit another crime. Crime is deterred when criminals are locked up, and incapable of victimizing society. Yet, when they are free, they commit crime. Therefore, prison is a deterrent to the extent that they cannot victimize us while they are locked up, except through lawsuits and assistance by the ACLU. Dead criminals are the reliably rehabilitated in the system.

This question truly is an individual, philosophical belief in whether it is morally correct to put murderers to death. There are no statistics to prove which point of view is morally correct. There is no data that will support rehabilitation v punishment. There just is no 'one size fits all' solution.

[Chocoholic]

<snipped for length>

This question truly is an individual, philosophical belief in whether it is morally correct to put murderers to death. There are no statistics to prove which point of view is morally correct. There is no data that will support rehabilitation v punishment. There just is no 'one size fits all' solution.

Witchita, thank you as always for your very respectful responses.

Yes the question is an individual, moral and ethical issue. It's not that I take issue with brutal beasts having to pay for their crimes. It's that I have seen cases where innocent people have been put on death row, or have been executed, when later it was found that these people were truly innocent.

I don't put my beliefs in the bible only. I believe that globally it's believed that killing another human being breaks all moral and ethical boundaries, most especially when science is still not exact, even where DNA is concerned.

I would rather that a person who is supposedly guilty of a crime be alive and be forced to work than that an innocent person is put to death by an imperfect syste.

The likes of Ted Bundy with proper security would never have gotten out of jail. The Green River Killer should never get out of jail. If they wish to hang themselves, let me provide some rope. It's their choice, not ours. I do not believe that we can make life and death decisions about other people's lives.

[Wichita]

I am no bible scholar, neither am I the epitome of Christian example. I am a student of the bible, and although I am a Christian,a sinner saved by grace, I am a perfect example of hypocrisy. Having said that, I will share that no human being, regardless of his spiritual beliefs or religious leanings, is capable of living outside the realm of hypocrisy. Even secular humanists, imo.

If one does not believe the in bible, then my efforts to answer the questions will likely not be accepted. Be that as it may, it is no simple matter to answer these questions from a biblical perspective without laying the proper foundation.

The law, as referred to in your post was handed down to Moses, and is found in the book of Exodus. The law concerning personal injuries begins in Chapter 21:12 "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. (13) And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place to which he shall flee. (14) But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbor, to slay him with guile, thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die. (15) And he that smiteth his father, or his mother, shall be surely put to death."
(16) And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death. (17) And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death. (18) And if men strive together, and one smite another with a stone, or with his fist, and he die not, but keepeth his bed; (19) If he rise again, and walketh abroad upon his staff, then shall he that smote him be clear: only he shall pay for the loss of his time, and shall cause him to be thoroughly healed.
(20) And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand, he shall be surely punished. (21) Notwithstanding, if he shall continue a day or two, he shall not be punished; for he is his money.
(22) If men strive, and hurt a woman with child, so that her fruit depart from her, and yet no mischief follows: he shall surely be punished, according as the woman's husband will lay upon him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. (23) and if any mischief follows, then thou shalt give life for life, Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe."

This is not the end of the law, it is just the beginning. Thankfully, we were made free from the burden of His law with the crucifixion of Christ. We were under a death sentence, because we are incapable of obeying the law. The death sentence we were under was the sentence of eternal separation from God, in a place of torment, or a spiritual death. However, we are still under law in our relationships with one another. The scriptures you mentioned to support your belief that the DP is wrong according to God, is not applicable to government. It is applicable to individuals. Notice the use of the pronoun "I", or "I'll", which is "I will". That particular proverb is instructing us not to seek individual revenge. This is why we make it illegal for us to individually stalk, and kill those who murder and rape us and our loved ones. Yet, we allow others, from an objective position, investigate, and bring charges against the one who committed the crime.

The instructions not to laugh at our enemies when they stumble, are relevant to our individual walk with God. The instruction is for us to trust Him to deal with those who individually hurt us. He uses the government to do this, but we reap what we sow, as a matter of the law of reciprocity which is also authored by God. What goes around comes around. The Buddhists call it Karma. It's really no different than God using doctors to heal our infirmities. He realizes that we are weak, and many of us do not trust in things we cannot see, such as Him. So, he gives us government to do his will, doctors to do his will, and instructions on how we should get along with one another in the process.

The law, as quoted above, has been fulfilled because of the crucifixion of Christ. By fulfilled, I mean that those who believe in Christ, no longer individually seek revenge. No more eye for an eye, but a trust that the government will seek justice on their behalf. However, in Romans Chapter 13, it says: " Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God. (2) Whoseover, therefore, resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves judgment. (3) For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Will thou, then, not be afraid of the power? Do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same. (4) For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain; for he is the minister of God, an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. (5) Wherefore, you must be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. (6) For this cause pay ye tribute also (taxes) for they are ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. (7) Render, therefore, to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honor to whom honor. (8) Owe no man any thing, but to love one another; for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law. (9) For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not murder, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet, and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. Love worketh no ill to its neighbor: therefore, love is the fulfilling of the law." (My post is too long. It is continued right behind this one.)

[Wichita]

The above means this to me, and this is just my own interpretation and opinion: If the government uses the dp as punishment for evil, as a Christian, I am to abide by the government's power. If the government does not use the dp as a punishment, then I am to abide by the government's power. The federal government, military, and 34 individual states in our union use the dp. The rest do not. If I individually disagreed with the dp, I would move to a state that did not apply it in their justice system, and vice versa. I have no personal responsibility for the decisions of government if I honor its decisions one way or the other. Therefore, I don't understand the personal sense of responsibility one may feel if an innocent convict is put to death. As I have said before, my anger and sense of guilt is more riled when a criminal is released to offend again. This absolutely happens more often than the remote possibility that an innocent is sentenced to death.

Love is the key, and you are no doubt wondering how I can say I love and forgive when I seemingly have no compassion for a condemned killer. I will use Karla Faye Tucker as an example. She murdered two people by hacking them to death with a mattux. A mattux is a tool with an ax blade on one end, and an entrenching tool on the other end of the head of the tool. She was in a drug crazed state when the murders were committed, and she was condemned to death. While on death row, missionaries went to death row to comfort the inmates, and to teach them that they are forgiven by Christ for their sin of murder. That means they are no longer under the spiritual penalty of death, if they confess, and believe that Christ can and will deliver them.

The missionaries also teach them Romans 13, which clearly establishes a New Testament standard of civil government, replete with the sword, which is not borne in vain. In other words, the death penalty. Karla Faye Tucker accepted as the truth the words of Christ, and accepted Him along with his forgiveness. However, she also clearly understood that she deserved the penalty she received. She accepted her fate, through faith, and testified to millions that she was deeply sorry for her sin against God and man. She learned the Lord's Prayer in sign language, and performed for television cameras in order to witness to others her acceptance of His will for her life. All of the law of Romans 13 was fulfilled in her arrest, conviction, condemnation, conversion, and temporal death at the hands of the government. The families of the victims were moved, and some of them forgave her. I prayed for her, and thanked God for sharing her conversion with the world for the sake of Christ. The performance of the Lord's Prayer by her in sign language was one of the most moving things I have ever witnessed.

Yet, she did not beg for clemency. She did not ask for lenience. She calmly admitted that she deserved death, and her only regret was that she could not bring back those she murdered. This is what it is all about. This is the love that we are supposed to have. We can love them, and forgive them, realizing that what we are doing is right and in accordance with scripture......if we believe in scripture. That is what I meant earlier in this thread when I said Christians can find justification, while humanists cannot. Humanists look for human answers to spiritual issues, and are constantly disappointed. I am not condemning humanists, I'm just pointing out a simple truth.

Therefore, my understanding of the scriptures we shared allows for government sanctions, including the dp, for crimes committed by individuals against individuals. If people's motive for the death penalty is revenge oriented, and in disagreement with the scriptures you shared, it is an individual sin we must ask forgiveness for from God. It is not grounds for not using the DP. I am guilty, because just today, I posted on another board how I hoped Carl Watts was being sodomized by a demon as we speak. This is a prime example of "laughing when thine enemy stumbleth", and I am guilty. Should Carl Watts be resurrected? God forbid! I will pay for my sin through the law of reciprocity "Be not deceived, God is not mocked, whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting." Galatians 7-9

I also need to love the victims, and their families and friends, not just the accused. I need to love them enough that I don't allow myself to be dissuaded from holding the criminal accountable, even to the extent of death if appropriate. If Karla Faye were to be spared because of her remorse, it would have been a mockery to her victims. If that had happened, I would have accepted it, because God instituted the government under which I live, according to scripture. As I said at the beginning, if one doesn't believe in the scripture, none of this will make a bit of difference.

[Wichita]

I understand your point, and I respect it. I have this discussion with my father-in law ever so often because he agrees with your pov. He is a devout catholic, and we have some pretty interesting discussions about the dp, and other social issues.

The book of Proverbs is one of my favorite in the bible. The words are so full of wisdom. They are not so much "preaching" as they are admonitions of King Solomon to his son in order for his son to avoid many of the tribulations of life by making poor decisions. Every time I let my mouth get me in trouble I am reminded of 17:28 "Even a fool, when he holds his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding."

I try to refrain from being a smart ass, but sometimes I pop off, like with the comment on the Monks.:o

[Joe Public]

Facts about the DP being a deterrent appear to contradict your opinion.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php?&did=1705#stateswithvwithout

Please be careful what you reference as fact. Because for evey postion on any issue that a reference lists as a "fact", we can find another that states the opposite.
i.e. - http://www.prodeathpenalty.com/DP.html#B.Deterrence

[accordn2me]

<snipped>It's that I have seen cases where innocent people have been put on death row, or have been executed, when later it was found that these people were truly innocent.<snipped>I'm sincerely interested in learning of such cases. Perhaps one or two true such examples could change my mind regarding the DP. Please cite links to: "cases where innocent people have been put on death row, or have been executed, when later it was found that these people were truly innocent." TIA

[Joe Public]

I'm sincerely interested in learning of such cases. Perhaps one or two true such examples could change my mind regarding the DP. Please cite links to: "cases where innocent people have been put on death row, or have been executed, when later it was found that these people were truly innocent." TIA

I'm sorry that I missed that post. I too would like to know of such cases. TMK no cases of innocent people being executed have been proven. I stand to be corrected though.

[Chocoholic]

I'm sincerely interested in learning of such cases. Perhaps one or two true such examples could change my mind regarding the DP. Please cite links to: "cases where innocent people have been put on death row, or have been executed, when later it was found that these people were truly innocent." TIA

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/07/wdna07.xml

http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/spring/cap/pro2.htm

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/na/chi-0412090169dec09,0,7244555.story

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html

You're welcome.

[Joe Public]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/07/wdna07.xml

http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~tonya/spring/cap/pro2.htm

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/na/chi-0412090169dec09,0,7244555.story

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/3472872.html

You're welcome.

I appreciate the links. And if true, they are sad stories. But what we were asking is, are there any cases that have been proven in a court that someone else committed these crimes? All I see in these articles are speculation by people with different points of view. These convicted killers were judged guilty by a jury of their peers based on evidence shown in court. Do you have any cases that prove your point by stating in court that these guys are innocent with provable evidence to support these claims?

[Chocoholic]

I appreciate the links. And if true, they are sad stories. But what we were asking is, are there any cases that have been proven in a court that someone else committed these crimes? All I see in these articles are speculation by people with different points of view. These convicted killers were judged guilty by a jury of their peers based on evidence shown in court. Do you have any cases that prove your point by stating in court that these guys are innocent with provable evidence to support these claims?


A person can't be tried for the same crime twice. Hence, if there is evidence to show that the person is innocent, the case doesn't go to trial, the person may be pardoned.

[Mishell1383]

Wichita, I must say your posts are the most intelligent, thought out little tidbits of information that I have EVER read. I greatly enjoy reading your posts, ad I look forward to reading and learning from you alot more. Thank you for sharing your knowledge. I am highly impressed

[Wichita]

Thank you for your kind, and encouraging comments. I don't know what to say..

[WarmNCozy]

Thank you for your kind, and encouraging comments. I don't know what to say..

You just BLUSH! I agree with Mishell! I love your posts!

[Chocoholic]

Great post...
My question is...If a criminal Sins against the victim...god...and society...Is this taken in to account by a court sentence...Is there a spiritual aspect to the sentence...Or is that part left to hope..

A criminal can repay or compensate a victim...(in some crimes)...Can carry out community service on probation for the society.... what about the god part ??

I don't know of a single person who can answer that for god.

[Mishell1383]

I don't know of a single person who can answer that for god.
Chco your right, no one can really answer that. However if I'm reading your post correctly beaky, I think a lot of the sentences are without God in mind due recently within the past 5 - 10 years or so , due to the seperation of church and state. I think it would go against new protocol to include God and religion with politics, crime and such. JMO

And to add my opinion on that, I don't agree I think they should leave it how our forefathers wrote it. In God We Trust. allmo

[Joe Public]

A person can't be tried for the same crime twice. Hence, if there is evidence to show that the person is innocent, the case doesn't go to trial, the person may be pardoned.

I must disagree, your right about not being able to be tried twice. But that is ONLY if you are found NOT GUILTY in the first place. If evidence comes to light that can and does prove your innocence then an appeal will be made. When the appeal is heard and the evidence is produced then one of two things happen. The conviction can be thrown out and the person set free (rare) or the conviction can be thrown out and a new trial can be issued. A pardon is the last chance of a condemnd man, not something that is given when evidence can prove they didn't commit the crime they were convicted for. Sorry, that's just the way it is.

[Wichita]

Aw, shucks....

[Joe Public]

Aw, shucks....

I'll bet your as red as the little smilie on your post. :D And ITA that you have great posts!!:seeya:

[Wichita]

You are all too kind to a red neck old Texican. I appreciate the feedback, and I I can't remember the last time I have been as positively affected with conversation as I have with all of you. My wife is starting to get a bit frustrated with how much time I am spending on these boards. I have tried to get her to register, and get involved, but no luck yet! Thanks, again....

[Its just me]

You are all too kind to a red neck old Texican. I appreciate the feedback, and I I can't remember the last time I have been as positively affected with conversation as I have with all of you. My wife is starting to get a bit frustrated with how much time I am spending on these boards. I have tried to get her to register, and get involved, but no luck yet! Thanks, again....


Dear Wichita, Your posts are some of the best reading outside the Word of God (Bible) I have ever read and they go far beyond the DP topic. ITA with every word you wrote and no one can prove your posts are not in perfect harmony with what God is telling us in His Word.

I got here because JoePublic left a prayer for Tara Grinstead's family. Thank you Joe for the prayer. I know Tara's family appreciates your thoughtfullness and kindness. I feel I've had a blessing of wisdom this morning.

Though I am not young in age.. I'm a child in the knowledge of God so my thoughts are not as deep as yours but on a more elementary level. The Bible is full of examples for us to follow in our lives today. My decision for being in favor of the DP is the example of Christ on the cross between the other two convicted men. Christ did not tell them they did not deserve to be hung on a cross (they were convicted by the Roman Law) but Christ told the one who believed He was the Christ "that day he would be with Him in Paradise" (I'm sure this is not an exact quote) Until I have a deeper understanding to change my mind I will remain in favor of the Death Penalty when it's decided by the laws of our land. Thank you Wichita for taking the time to share your knowledge of our Father God and Lord Jesus Christ. God Bless. Its Just Me (IJM)

[slynn14]

I know this topic of the DP is debatable enough already, but I wanted to ask the readers here their opinions or feelings on a couple questions. I'd be most interested in hearing the opinions of people from places the DP is practiced but obviously all are welcome!

Most know that the eye-for-an-eye system of punishment has been around since the time of Hammurabi.....my question is this: Does God (or a supreme creator) play a role in the DP? If we base our belief of the DP on religious tenants, does it mean that the precepts in the Bible, etc. aren't valid? For instance, the Bible tells us that God pledges vengence, for us not to take part. Does that say something about the faith of those who believe what the Bible says but then support the DP also?

I don't intend to inflame with this question but am genuinely interested in how others may answer or view this.

Thanks and ALLMO,
R

Hi I'm new here thought I would share my thougths, from personal experience, many at my church are against the death penalty, I only have met a few that are for the death penalty, and both sides use the Bible has thier guide in why they believe what they believe.

Capital Punishment has been a sensitive spot to me for many years. I lost a friend to Micheal Ross, and a family member has been in prison for rape. so it's hard for me to know exactly what is right. How we know EXACTLY what is?
I can say both due to the circumstances of the cases, but I don't want to be a see-saw my entire life, I know we need to be safe in our society, I also know that we need to show love and mercy like God has.

not sure if this makes any sense, hope this helps

slynn

[The R]

Hi I'm new here thought I would share my thougths, from personal experience, many at my church are against the death penalty, I only have met a few that are for the death penalty, and both sides use the Bible has thier guide in why they believe what they believe.

Capital Punishment has been a sensitive spot to me for many years. I lost a friend to Micheal Ross, and a family member has been in prison for rape. so it's hard for me to know exactly what is right. How we know EXACTLY what is?
I can say both due to the circumstances of the cases, but I don't want to be a see-saw my entire life, I know we need to be safe in our society, I also know that we need to show love and mercy like God has.

not sure if this makes any sense, hope this helps

slynn


slynn,

what you say makes perfectly good sense. Thanks for sharing your personal experience.


ALLMO,
R

[The R]

You are all too kind to a red neck old Texican. I appreciate the feedback, and I I can't remember the last time I have been as positively affected with conversation as I have with all of you. My wife is starting to get a bit frustrated with how much time I am spending on these boards. I have tried to get her to register, and get involved, but no luck yet! Thanks, again....

Wichita,

You already know how I feel about your posts.....you are too modest!! I enjoy your perspective as well and although I don't necessarily agree with all of your views I do respect them. Please let me know the next time time I can sit in on one of the 'family' debates......

:)

ALLMO,
R

[sunbeam]

I know this topic of the DP is debatable enough already, but I wanted to ask the readers here their opinions or feelings on a couple questions. I'd be most interested in hearing the opinions of people from places the DP is practiced but obviously all are welcome!

Most know that the eye-for-an-eye system of punishment has been around since the time of Hammurabi.....my question is this: Does God (or a supreme creator) play a role in the DP? If we base our belief of the DP on religious tenants, does it mean that the precepts in the Bible, etc. aren't valid? For instance, the Bible tells us that God pledges vengence, for us not to take part. Does that say something about the faith of those who believe what the Bible says but then support the DP also?

I don't intend to inflame with this question but am genuinely interested in how others may answer or view this.

Thanks and ALLMO,
R

Yes I do believe God plays a role in the death penalty. God decides when someone's life should be up, not us as a society or our fellow humans. True- the murderer decided to end someone else's life viciously, but should we as a society act on that revengeful and repulsive way, and take away another's life, just as the murderer did? I don't think so.... Who are WE to decide it's up to US to end someone's life. Prison is punishment. Life without parole is punishment... Executing the condemned murderer is sometimes even giving them the easy way out. Put them in a private cell alone, away from the general prison population for 20 years, and then end their already dehumanizing life by killing them.
www.cacp.org (Catholics Against Capital Punishment)
The death penalty is immoral, inhumane, and all about revenge. It is murder. We have become the unholy one, once we cheer on that person's execution. We have become revengeful and inhume ourselves. How about letting God decide when it's the murderer's time to die. How about letting God punish them in eternal hell or heaven when their time comes. Maybe they are suppose to live longer in order to get punished more in prison. I think so.

[Joe Public]

Yes I do believe God plays a role in the death penalty. God decides when someone's life should be up, not us as a society or our fellow humans. True- the murderer decided to end someone else's life viciously, but should we as a society act on that revengeful and repulsive way, and take away another's life, just as the murderer did? I don't think so.... Who are WE to decide it's up to US to end someone's life. Prison is punishment. Life without parole is punishment... Executing the condemned murderer is sometimes even giving them the easy way out. Put them in a private cell alone, away from the general prison population for 20 years, and then end their already dehumanizing life by killing them.
www.cacp.org (http://www.cacp.org) (Catholics Against Capital Punishment)
The death penalty is immoral, inhumane, and all about revenge. It is murder. We have become the unholy one, once we cheer on that person's execution. We have become revengeful and inhume ourselves. How about letting God decide when it's the murderer's time to die. How about letting God punish them in eternal hell or heaven when their time comes. Maybe they are suppose to live longer in order to get punished more in prison. I think so.

But if you say God decides when we live or die would it not be fair to say that God has this person will die, DP or not. How do you know that he/she being put to death isn't part of his grand design?

[Wichita]

I wrote a couple of looooong posts above, which outlines the old testament references to the death penalty, then the new testament. I am just as confident that God has given us the authority to use the death penalty, as you are that we do not. In fact, there is not one scripture in the Bible that supports your argument that we, as a corporate government, do not have that right. The references that people have used to argue about vengeance, and forgiveness is admonition on a personal level. We can forgive the murderer, and fulfill the dp in accordance with the law, and not be guilty of sin. If we personally celebrate the putting to death of a fellow human being, then that is a personal transgression, not a corporate one, because not every person celebrates such an event by virtue of supporting it.

If we do not take care of ourselves, God is not going to do it for us. We are to govern ourselves, and obey the powers that be, according to Romans, Chapter 13. That does not mean that we, as individuals, hunt down the murderer, and hang him without due process of law. That is revenge. We are to send the police to make the arrest, provide the evidence that is legally obtained, and then have the prosecutor build a case based on the facts. Defense attorneys are able many times to show reasonable doubt, and free the accused. These are the powers that be, and are ordained of God, to serve as ministers for good on behalf of society. Don't take my word for it, read it for yourself. Discuss it with your priest, and study other references.

If you believe in God, do you also believe in satan? If so, then you must know that satan, according to scripture, is the author of confusion and the father of lies. Satan's goal is to lie to us, and keep us confused about what is right, because he wants to prove that he is just as great as God. When we who believe in God, deny that God is sovereign, and refuse to accept the truth that he has the power to delegate authority to mankind to govern themselves, then we are confused by the lies of satan.

On the other hand, if we don't believe in God, then from whom do we get authority to govern? Ourselves, because we are a law unto ourselves if we have never heard the truth, or if we have heard, to deny the truth of God's authority. If unbelievers have given the government authority to take life, then that authority is still legally given by the people. Since our nation, and government, is comprised of both believers and unbelievers, then I submit that the penalties handed down by courts are not influenced by God. In my experience, about as many believers disagree with the DP as unbelievers who support it.

Therefore, the DP is not immoral, because it is a lawful activity. Since it is lawful, it is not murder, and does not meet the definition of murder. Whether it is inhumane is a matter of opinion, too, because a needle in the arm is a far cry from strangulation, stabbing, throat cutting, shooting, etc. It seems like some who disagree with the DP want to use guilt as a tool to effect change on a national level. I am free from guilt on this issue, because I believe in what the scripture says, and I haven't relied upon someone else's opinion of what it means. I'm not saying that you have, I'm just commenting that many people don't read the bible because it is complicated. They let others with do the reading, and interpret for them what they think it means. Like many things in life, it is the path of least resistance....:)

[Chocoholic]

But if you say God decides when we live or die would it not be fair to say that God has this person will die, DP or not. How do you know that he/she being put to death isn't part of his grand design?

When persons invoke the DP and execute a man I don't believe that it's actually god or a supreme creator at the controls, unless you know somebody who has taken on the physical appearance of said god or supreme creator.

[Chocoholic]

I wrote a couple of looooong posts above, which outlines the old testament references to the death penalty, then the new testament. <snipped for length>

My entire issue with the bible is that what is written is not perfect, it wasn't written by god or the supreme creator it was tales interpreted by men. Those tales have been translated into many languages throughout the ages. It's difficult at best to truly understand what god's will is after so many interpretations.

If what the bible says is right, then it is wrong for us to decide which person is "good" and which person is "evil". Certainly we can acknowledge evil acts, but that doesn't mean that the person itself is.

That and the decision to end a life by execution - especially when a person might be innocent - should be left to higher powers than us.

[Joe Public]

It's difficult at best to truly understand what god's will is after so many interpretations.

So this being said, would it not be fair to say that since "It's difficult at best to truly understand what god's will is..." that his "will" could be that mankind as a whole has the ability to end a life of a vicious killer?

[Chocoholic]

So this being said, would it not be fair to say that since "It's difficult at best to truly understand what god's will is..." that his "will" could be that mankind as a whole has the ability to end a life of a vicious killer?
I say it's fair to leave that decision up to the maker, not the interpretation of mankind.

[sunbeam]

Hi I'm new here thought I would share my thougths, from personal experience, many at my church are against the death penalty, I only have met a few that are for the death penalty, and both sides use the Bible has thier guide in why they believe what they believe.

Capital Punishment has been a sensitive spot to me for many years. I lost a friend to Micheal Ross, and a family member has been in prison for rape. so it's hard for me to know exactly what is right. How we know EXACTLY what is?
I can say both due to the circumstances of the cases, but I don't want to be a see-saw my entire life, I know we need to be safe in our society, I also know that we need to show love and mercy like God has.

not sure if this makes any sense, hope this helps

slynn
Why do we need to kill the convicted murderer in order to be protected? What's wrong with life in prison as punishment? Do we really need to stoop as low as the killer and kill them? Just to show and prove- revenge.

I understand this being a sensitive spot for you since you lost a friend to Michael Ross. But you do have a family member in prison, and wouldn't it affect your family if he were executed? Executions only bring more death, and re-hash old death. It really doesn't bring back the deceased or make healing any easier.

[Wichita]

When is the last time you, or anyone you know, has seen God take direct control of any human event? The point is that you are mistaken that we don't have the moral, legal, and even spiritual authority to take human life through the system of justice that we have set up. I am not trying to change your mind. I am just saying that you should read the scripture, follow the the references in the margins of your bible, and ask others whose opinions you might respect whether or not your position may be contrary to scripture.
Of course, if you have already done that, and you refuse to change your position, that is between you and God. But, I am not condemned because I support the DP, any more than you are blessed by your denial of the right to practice it as a corporate government. Individually, we cannot kill for revenge, either according to God's law, or man's. You are confusing the two lines of authority.

[sunbeam]

When is the last time you, or anyone you know, has seen God take direct control of any human event? The point is that you are mistaken that we don't have the moral, legal, and even spiritual authority to take human life through the system of justice that we have set up. I am not trying to change your mind. I am just saying that you should read the scripture, follow the the references in the margins of your bible, and ask others whose opinions you might respect whether or not your position may be contrary to scripture.
Of course, if you have already done that, and you refuse to change your position, that is between you and God. But, I am not condemned because I support the DP, any more than you are blessed by your denial of the right to practice it as a corporate government. Individually, we cannot kill for revenge, either according to God's law, or man's. You are confusing the two lines of authority.
No, you are not condemned, don't worry. You are entitled to feel as you feel, and I'm not trying to change your mind either.

[Chocoholic]

When is the last time you, or anyone you know, has seen God take direct control of any human event? The point is that you are mistaken that we don't have the moral, legal, and even spiritual authority to take human life through the system of justice that we have set up. I am not trying to change your mind. I am just saying that you should read the scripture, follow the the references in the margins of your bible, and ask others whose opinions you might respect whether or not your position may be contrary to scripture.
Of course, if you have already done that, and you refuse to change your position, that is between you and God. But, I am not condemned because I support the DP, any more than you are blessed by your denial of the right to practice it as a corporate government. Individually, we cannot kill for revenge, either according to God's law, or man's. You are confusing the two lines of authority.

Witchita I'm old enough to be a grandparent and I don't need to go to a person that I respect to form an opinion. I've tossed this debate around long enough to be able to comfortably stand by what I believe.

I don't believe the bible is holy scripture. What my relationship is with the Supreme Creator is indeed what I base my morals and ethics on.

An opinion isn't wrong, an opinion isn't incorrect. Opinions may be based on incorrect information but I feel that I have based my opinions based on the ethics and morals that I was taught and learned.

What I see as God's law and what you see as God's law are simply based on different points of view, different education and different cultures. That doesn't mean I think your opinion is wrong, I just disagree with your point of view regarding the death penalty.

[Joe Public]

I say it's fair to leave that decision up to the maker, not the interpretation of mankind.

This would be a "what if". Did Jesus not say that what we hold true on earth, he will hold true in heaven? (not a quote obviously) So if the church stated that murders, thieves, and rapists are to be put to death as divine punishment, does that make it okay since the church mandated it? The question was posed to me during a conversation about the DP eariler today.

[Chocoholic]

This would be a "what if". Did Jesus not say that what we hold true on earth, he will hold true in heaven? (not a quote obviously) So if the church stated that murders, thieves, and rapists are to be put to death as divine punishment, does that make it okay since the church mandated it? The question was posed to me during a conversation about the DP eariler today.

I think we can fairly state that with the many different even disregarding just the many Christian denominations, whatever prophet we choose to follow it is "man's" interpretation of the Supreme Creator's laws. I'm sorry but I have no regard for churches other than to admire their ability to raise funds. Great money makers.

Let me just take this as an example, please bear with me.

A pope (sorry it's late don't feel like doing the research now) decided that it was sinful to eat meat on Fridays. Sinners as "we" all know go to hell. Recently it was decided by another pope that eating meat on Friday should be okie dokie and God would probably forgive those who would eat meat.

What about the poor buggers that have since died but nevertheless sinned because they ate meat on Fridays? Are they all in hell for it?

Do Catholics go to a Catholic hell for it? Do Muslim go to a Muslim hell for eating pork? Do Hindus go to a Hindu hell for eating beef? *sigh*

As I said, it's an interpretation made by man. Full of flaws, as we all are.

In short my answer is a resounding "no". Just because some church backs the DP doesn't make it morally or ethically right, any more than polygamy.

[Luke Davis]

While I don't think God plays a part in the death penalty, there are historical accounts of divine intervention throughout history. From escaping fire and a lion's den to ropes breaking and electric chairs failing. I believe it was an English punishment at one time to throw people with weights into a river, if the river spit them out they were innocent.

In California's San Quentin more condemned die from suicide than are executed. Some consider that an act of God.


Not a Second Time (http://www.snopes.com/legal/second.asp)

[Joe Public]

While I don't think God plays a part in the death penalty, there are historical accounts of divine intervention throughout history. From escaping fire and a lion's den to ropes breaking and electric chairs failing. I believe it was an English punishment at one time to throw people with weights into a river, if the river spit them out they were innocent.

In California's San Quentin more condemned die from suicide than are executed. Some consider that an act of God.


Not a Second Time (http://www.snopes.com/legal/second.asp)

I couldn't agree more. If God wanted someone to die it would happen with or without the help of man. God tends to employ the tools of man to fulfill his design. Yes we have choices, but I believe that some results would happen no matter which choice we make. This is were God's will comes in. But, I could be wrong. FWIW.

[Chocoholic]

While I don't think God plays a part in the death penalty, there are historical accounts of divine intervention throughout history. From escaping fire and a lion's den to ropes breaking and electric chairs failing. I believe it was an English punishment at one time to throw people with weights into a river, if the river spit them out they were innocent.

In California's San Quentin more condemned die from suicide than are executed. Some consider that an act of God.


Not a Second Time (http://www.snopes.com/legal/second.asp)

Ahh yes the ever popular witch hunts. Belief then was that if you floated you were a witch and you would be killed, if you sank you weren't a witch but you died anyway. I bet it sucked not having had swimming lessons. It only goes to prove my point that this type of "punishment" along with the DP is antiquated.

[Joe Public]

Ahh yes the ever popular witch hunts. Belief then was that if you floated you were a witch and you would be killed, if you sank you weren't a witch but you died anyway. I bet it sucked not having had swimming lessons. It only goes to prove my point that this type of "punishment" along with the DP is antiquated.

But they couldn't prove that someone was a witch to the extent that we can that someone is a killer. With DNA you can get as high as 99.999999% that person killed someone. They had nothing like that back in those days. And DNA is enough for me to vote guilty and vote for the DP.

[accordn2me]

Ahh yes the ever popular witch hunts. Belief then was that if you floated you were a witch and you would be killed, if you sank you weren't a witch but you died anyway. I bet it sucked not having had swimming lessons. It only goes to prove my point that this type of "punishment" along with the DP is antiquated.Go figure, I'm lost....again! What does witch hunts have to do w/ (modern day) capital punishment? Did the condemned witches commit capital murder?

[Chocoholic]

Go figure, I'm lost....again! What does witch hunts have to do w/ (modern day) capital punishment? Did the condemned witches commit capital murder?

No, and that is the point.

[Joe Public]

Go figure, I'm lost....again! What does witch hunts have to do w/ (modern day) capital punishment? Did the condemned witches commit capital murder?
She was referring to the statement made by Witchita about dropping people in the river tied to stones and them floating or not.

Thus I refer to my last post for an answer and would like to state that we are more enlightened now than 300 years ago.

[Joe Public]

No, and that is the point.
No, that's not the point. The point is that as a society we were not as advanced in proving guilt or innocence as we are now with fingerprints, DNA, and trace evidence. Sorry but you (or anyone else) can't refute GOOD science.

[The R]

She was referring to the statement made by Witchita about dropping people in the river tied to stones and them floating or not.

Thus I refer to my last post for an answer and would like to state that we are more enlightened now than 300 years ago.

Interesting observation....

I do see the point Choc was making too. If we believe that God only has the right to decide life and death in a 'fated' way, why would anything else matter? I mean if we suspect someone is guilty of murder then why not just place them in the electric chair and pull the switch hard? If they're not guilty, then God knows that and wouldn't let them die......lol.....that is a pretty ridiculous approach to reason IMO. It leads to kooks, like Choc said, throwing people in the river to see if they can float.

With all due respect to Wichita and the thoughts of the authority of the goverment to use the DP while being ordained by God, I do tend to disagree somewhat. It makes me feel uneasy to say that I shouldn't feel a responsibility towards a fellow human that's innocent and dies by the DP; and I don't think I could justify it happening by using the authority of the Bible either. Wichita, do you think that if the person you've loved most in this life was wrongly accused and faced the DP that you would feel the same way? That it would be OK with you for them to die unjustly because the Bible says give to Caesar what is his?

With the Bible in particular, I tend to view the OT as good information to live by for the most part, but it is based on oral tradition, not historical account and therefore most likely is a little less accurate. I do view the NT however as much more in line with what I believe personally and much more provable historically speaking.

Just my 2 cents.

ALLMO,
R

[Chocoholic]

No, that's not the point. The point is that as a society we were not as advanced in proving guilt or innocence as we are now with fingerprints, DNA, and trace evidence. Sorry but you (or anyone else) can't refute GOOD science.

Who is to say what is good science? 40 yrs ago "good science" was blood typing evidence. Now DNA is considered "good science" but links have been posted that even DNA evidence is far from perfect (chimera)

Chimerism can be detected in DNA testing. The Lydia Fairchild case, for example, was brought to court after DNA testing showed that her children could not be hers, since DNA did not match. The charge against her was dismissed when it became clear that Lydia was a chimera, with the matching DNA being found in her cervical tissue. Another case was that of Karen Keegan.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimera_(genetics)

[Wichita]

We are roughly the same age, as I have grandchildren. I, on the other hand, do need input from others whose thoughts and ideas I respect, which includes yours. It keeps me humble....not that I have any reason to be arrogant, other than my humanity. I appreciate lively debate without anger.

[Wichita]

I think you made a very valid counterpoint, Joe.

[Wichita]

"R", You have great ability to get the heart of the matter....When I posted the scriptures, it was in an attempt to show the differences between the old and new testament viewpoint. The writing of Mosaic law was at least 1000 BC, while the new testament was written within the first 100 years AD.

What I tried to communicate, and obviously failed to do, was point out that our nation was founded on the Judeo-Christian principles of the bible. Our constitution has been interpreted, and continues to be so as our culture and its values change. For people who ascribe to the principles of the bible, for Jews the old testament, and for Christians, both; the bible is the rule and guide for faith and practice. It is where we go to find answers to difficult questions. Sometimes the answers are plainly spoken, and sometimes not. Therefore, the bible is our moral justification for the use of the DP, or not, depending on the interpretation by the individual, or even religious denomination. Those who do not believe that the bible is God's word, cannot find comfort, or justification in its passages, and they look elsewhere. Usually, they look inward first, to determine what they "feel" is right, or morally correct. If still not satisfied, they may read what others have said who also profess no faith in the scripture, or in God. In other words, they look to human beings, the most intellectually advanced animal on the planet, because of our ability to reason and choose. Either way, we have rules to live by. I do not believe that God's rules are a consideration in today's sentencing parameters. I believe we find justification, or not, based on our core values of faith, either in God, or in humanity. (Self)

I do not ascribe to the Mosaic Law in my personal faith and practice to the extent that an 'eye for an eye' etc., is the way it should be. I tried to articulate through my understanding of spiritual dispensation, that the advent of Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Law, and our penalty of universal, spiritual death under that law. In the new Testament, we are still to abide by the commandments not to murder, commit adultery, etc, but these laws are for our guidance primarily between ourselves as human beings, but to God first.

Even if the DP was abolished, believers would abide by the rule of law, or not; as is currently the case. It is simply a matter of justification. I find justification in the scripture, because I believe the scripture. Others do not for the same reason. This is the first forum, outside my living room, that I have been able to discuss this without being persecuted. I'm having a great time. :)

As to your question of whether I could bear the burden of knowing my most loved one may be punished by death unjustly, I have given a great deal thought to this over the years. I would fight for justice with every fiber of my being. I would feel betrayed if it failed to stop the execution. I would feel like overthrowing the system in any way I could. I would feel worse than words can describe. But, I would also know of a certainty that a day of reckoning is coming, and vengeance is God's. But, I would accept the injustice. If my loved one were guilty beyond reasonable doubt, I would support the death penalty....even if I were my most loved person.

How can I say that? Because we are conditioned to accept injustice. The experiment with Prohibition of alcohol is a prime example. It gave rise to organized crime, and since it has been legalized, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives have been ruined, lost, and irreparably damaged by its abuse.
If I apply the same logic that I am responsible for the death of an innocent after a death sentence is carried out, then I am guilty of all the mayhem of alcohol abuse, because I have supported the legalization of it.

Thanks for starting this thread, "R". It gives me a great deal pleasure to think deeply about my beliefs, and try to effectively communicate them. Many people who do not ascribe to my "faith" would have judged me "ignorant". (Perhaps some have, and are polite enough to hold their comments. Thank You.) At any rate, thanks for your insight. :seeya:

[Wichita]

That wasn't mine, Joe, it was Accordn2me.....

[The R]

"R", You have great ability to get the heart of the matter....When I posted the scriptures, it was in an attempt to show the differences between the old and new testament viewpoint. The writing of Mosaic law was at least 1000 BC, while the new testament was written within the first 100 years AD.

What I tried to communicate, and obviously failed to do, was point out that our nation was founded on the Judeo-Christian principles of the bible. Our constitution has been interpreted, and continues to be so as our culture and its values change. For people who ascribe to the principles of the bible, for Jews the old testament, and for Christians, both; the bible is the rule and guide for faith and practice. It is where we go to find answers to difficult questions. Sometimes the answers are plainly spoken, and sometimes not. Therefore, the bible is our moral justification for the use of the DP, or not, depending on the interpretation by the individual, or even religious denomination. Those who do not believe that the bible is God's word, cannot find comfort, or justification in its passages, and they look elsewhere. Usually, they look inward first, to determine what they "feel" is right, or morally correct. If still not satisfied, they may read what others have said who also profess no faith in the scripture, or in God. In other words, they look to human beings, the most intellectually advanced animal on the planet, because of our ability to reason and choose. Either way, we have rules to live by. I do not believe that God's rules are a consideration in today's sentencing parameters. I believe we find justification, or not, based on our core values of faith, either in God, or in humanity. (Self)

I do not ascribe to the Mosaic Law in my personal faith and practice to the extent that an 'eye for an eye' etc., is the way it should be. I tried to articulate through my understanding of spiritual dispensation, that the advent of Christ fulfilled the Mosaic Law, and our penalty of universal, spiritual death under that law. In the new Testament, we are still to abide by the commandments not to murder, commit adultery, etc, but these laws are for our guidance primarily between ourselves as human beings, but to God first.

Even if the DP was abolished, believers would abide by the rule of law, or not; as is currently the case. It is simply a matter of justification. I find justification in the scripture, because I believe the scripture. Others do not for the same reason. This is the first forum, outside my living room, that I have been able to discuss this without being persecuted. I'm having a great time. :)

As to your question of whether I could bear the burden of knowing my most loved one may be punished by death unjustly, I have given a great deal thought to this over the years. I would fight for justice with every fiber of my being. I would feel betrayed if it failed to stop the execution. I would feel like overthrowing the system in any way I could. I would feel worse than words can describe. But, I would also know of a certainty that a day of reckoning is coming, and vengeance is God's. But, I would accept the injustice. If my loved one were guilty beyond reasonable doubt, I would support the death penalty....even if I were my most loved person.

How can I say that? Because we are conditioned to accept injustice. The experiment with Prohibition of alcohol is a prime example. It gave rise to organized crime, and since it has been legalized, hundreds of thousands, if not millions of lives have been ruined, lost, and irreparably damaged by its abuse.
If I apply the same logic that I am responsible for the death of an innocent after a death sentence is carried out, then I am guilty of all the mayhem of alcohol abuse, because I have supported the legalization of it.

Thanks for starting this thread, "R". It gives me a great deal pleasure to think deeply about my beliefs, and try to effectively communicate them. Many people who do not ascribe to my "faith" would have judged me "ignorant". (Perhaps some have, and are polite enough to hold their comments. Thank You.) At any rate, thanks for your insight. :seeya:

Thanks Wichita for your kind remarks. I also appreciate your well thought out and sound argument. I can't take much credit fot the idea behind the thread though. There is someone I consider a friend who has a real burden for trying to help people understand the reason(s) we practrice the DP. I had a discussion with the friend about the DP and they remarked that since the DP didn't appear to be a deterrent, that maybe we as a society should embrace exactly why we practice it......hence the idea for the thread.

If I were a staunch opponent of the DP, I believe I could make a pretty good case to Christians that practicing the DP is definitely a strong indicator of a lack of their faith in God. I've never done a lot of thinking on it obviously, and the case for a lack of faith may have already been made many times over, I'm not sure; but it would seem that at least on the surface that this is the case.

Anyway, thanks for the input from everyone! I do appreciate the thoughts from all on this issue! :)


ALLMO,
R

[Wichita]

You would be correct that faith is lacking. That's why we visit doctors, hire lawyers, etc. Yet, the scriptures teach healing by faith. Another time and place for this discussion perhaps...

[accordn2me]

You would be correct that faith is lacking. That's why we visit doctors, hire lawyers, etc. Yet, the scriptures teach healing by faith. Another time and place for this discussion perhaps...You articulate my beliefs virtually to a T. That's why I waited for you to respond. And ya came through! :rose:

Wichita, when Christians go to doctors, lawyers, mechanics, accountants, etc., does that indicate "faith is lacking?"

This question reminds me of a joke....I'm as bad at telling jokes as I am at getting points across too....but I do try....here goes:

This guy went for a swim in the ocean and was swept out to sea. After several hours of trying to reach shore on his own, he began to pray to God. After a while, here comes a fisherman on a boat. He reached out and said, "Take my hand and I'll help you aboard." The guy in the water said, "No! I don't need your help." Fisherman goes on. Another hour or so passes and a sailor comes sailing along. He reaches out offering help but the guy refuses. Sailor sails away. Several more hours go by. The man in the ocean is nearing exhaustion. Lo and behold, here comes a luxury cruise liner. The crew spots the man who is near death, yet he refuses the offer to be rescued. Reluctantly, the captain keeps his ship on course and the swimmer drowns and goes to heaven. As soon as he is standing before God, he exclaims, "God, I can't believe you let me drown as I was begging you for my life!" God answers, "What else was I supposed to do? I sent a fishing boat, a sailboat, and a cruise ship, but you wouldn't get on board!"

[Joe Public]

That wasn't mine, Joe, it was Accordn2me.....

Sorry, I was working all night and I think my eyes were playing tricks on me. I felt like a :chicken: running around with my head cut off!! :patriot:

[Joe Public]

You articulate my beliefs virtually to a T. That's why I waited for you to respond. And ya came through! :rose:

Wichita, when Christians go to doctors, lawyers, mechanics, accountants, etc., does that indicate "faith is lacking?"

This question reminds me of a joke....I'm as bad at telling jokes as I am at getting points across too....but I do try....here goes:

This guy went for a swim in the ocean and was swept out to sea. After several hours of trying to reach shore on his own, he began to pray to God. After a while, here comes a fisherman on a boat. He reached out and said, "Take my hand and I'll help you aboard." The guy in the water said, "No! I don't need your help." Fisherman goes on. Another hour or so passes and a sailor comes sailing along. He reaches out offering help but the guy refuses. Sailor sails away. Several more hours go by. The man in the ocean is nearing exhaustion. Lo and behold, here comes a luxury cruise liner. The crew spots the man who is near death, yet he refuses the offer to be rescued. Reluctantly, the captain keeps his ship on course and the swimmer drowns and goes to heaven. As soon as he is standing before God, he exclaims, "God, I can't believe you let me drown as I was begging you for my life!" God answers, "What else was I supposed to do? I sent a fishing boat, a sailboat, and a cruise ship, but you wouldn't get on board!"

And purely by accident you have made my point about the whole God and DP subject. It is known to priest, preachers, monks and most common people that god works through mankind and by that uses mankinds tools.

That being said, it is very likely that any punishment given to a murderer, rapist, or child molester is in direct relation to god using us to punish this person. God has final judgement and maybe using us as a group is his way of dishing out that punishment whether it be the DP or not.

Just some food for thought. FWIW.

[Wichita]

I've told that one myself! The point is pretty obvious. I'm not a preacher, or ordained minister. I have, however, studied the bible for myself, looking for the answers to life. I have found what works for me, and I have enjoyed being able to share my own thoughts with others. I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want them to know that I have found peace in the faith I have. Jesus himself said that if our faith were as large as a mustard seed, we could move mountains with prayer. Now, I don't think I have ever met anyone with that kind of faith. So, "R" is correct in his thesis that Christians lack faith. I admit it.

As to your question? Well, I guess it depends whom you ask. In my mind, Doctors are ministers to give comfort and help us be healed of many of life's diseases. I know of at least two people who were healed of cancer back in the early 80's. Prayer was employed by the Doctors, who were Christians, in addition to the medications. Of course, if the patient refuses to believe in healing, will he be healed? I think people have faith in things they take for granted. When I walk into a dark room and flip a switch to turn on the light, I have been conditioned to believe the light will turn on. When it doesn't, I don't think "Wow. Electricity doesn't exist after all." I look for why it didn't come on, and make a repair if it is within my power. Sometimes its up to the power company, but most of the time, I change the bulb. It took some effort, but the light now works. That is how faith works, too. If one never exercises it, it has a tendency not to work. Sometimes it takes a little effort on our part to get the power company's attention, and never in my life has the power company called to ask me if I have enough power. It's up to me to call. I hope this is an answer you can find comfort in....and, I know from experience that God sends people to do his will who don't even believe he exists, such as some doctors, just the same as satan sends those who seem to be full of light, or profess faith in God, such as some preachers, but are wolves in sheep's clothing. Should we be wise as serpents, and meek as doves? Most of the time....but there is a time for all things under the sun, including the death penalty, imo. :read:

[Wichita]

Not a problem! I've worked a few night shifts...I can relate!

[Chocoholic]

We are roughly the same age, as I have grandchildren. I, on the other hand, do need input from others whose thoughts and ideas I respect, which includes yours. It keeps me humble....not that I have any reason to be arrogant, other than my humanity. I appreciate lively debate without anger.

I appreciate your comments and didn't mean to appear to be arrogant. I think we all look to sources we believe in and trust for guidance. Although the bible sometimes makes an interesting read, and some portions are applicable for everybody, such as kindness, forgiveness etc, I feel there are other books and spiritual leaders that I can learn from. I don't feel the need to look for guidance in other directions so that I can come to accept the DP.

[The R]

I've told that one myself! The point is pretty obvious. I'm not a preacher, or ordained minister. I have, however, studied the bible for myself, looking for the answers to life. I have found what works for me, and I have enjoyed being able to share my own thoughts with others. I'm not trying to convert anyone, I just want them to know that I have found peace in the faith I have. Jesus himself said that if our faith were as large as a mustard seed, we could move mountains with prayer. Now, I don't think I have ever met anyone with that kind of faith. So, "R" is correct in his thesis that Christians lack faith. I admit it.

As to your question? Well, I guess it depends whom you ask. In my mind, Doctors are ministers to give comfort and help us be healed of many of life's diseases. I know of at least two people who were healed of cancer back in the early 80's. Prayer was employed by the Doctors, who were Christians, in addition to the medications. Of course, if the patient refuses to believe in healing, will he be healed? I think people have faith in things they take for granted. When I walk into a dark room and flip a switch to turn on the light, I have been conditioned to believe the light will turn on. When it doesn't, I don't think "Wow. Electricity doesn't exist after all." I look for why it didn't come on, and make a repair if it is within my power. Sometimes its up to the power company, but most of the time, I change the bulb. It took some effort, but the light now works. That is how faith works, too. If one never exercises it, it has a tendency not to work. Sometimes it takes a little effort on our part to get the power company's attention, and never in my life has the power company called to ask me if I have enough power. It's up to me to call. I hope this is an answer you can find comfort in....and, I know from experience that God sends people to do his will who don't even believe he exists, such as some doctors, just the same as satan sends those who seem to be full of light, or profess faith in God, such as some preachers, but are wolves in sheep's clothing. Should we be wise as serpents, and meek as doves? Most of the time....but there is a time for all things under the sun, including the death penalty, imo. :read:


No need for any confessions here Wichita, maybe you've been hanging out with that priest a little too much? :)

My statement about a lack of faith was just a general observation. Since you got some support from the Amen corner, I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in.....

I don't feel that the comparison regarding a lack of faith in people who go to doctors, etc. is as valid as saying there is a lack of faith in those who practice the death penalty. To say the two are comparable is a bit like comparing apples to oranges and oversimplifies the matter somewhat.

Just a couple of points:

I don't ever recall reading in the King's english, "Thou Shalt Not Visit Thy Physician." In fact, I don't remember there being any biblical support for not going to a doctor. One of the Apostles himself was a physician. If you have any support biblically for not seeing a doctor, please share it.... and I say that with sincerity. You do raise a good point with the issue of faith healing.

I do however remember reading, "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Whether or not this applies to the DP I could not say for sure, but the mere fact that it is there shows the differences in the comparison you made.

In the instances of the DP and a doctor's visit as they relate to faith I'd have to say that seeing a doctor is generally considered a positive practice to prolong and give a better quality to life; life that is considered valuable. On the other hand the DP is a pretty dark thing that deals with the end of a life and in the end could be considered a little more serious than going to the doctor for cold relief.

ALLMO,
R

[Wichita]

My comment was off the cuff, without a great deal of thought going into it. I made sense in my mind, because I know myself. It was meant to indirectly compliment you on your ability to know what you believe without input from other sources. I have a tendency to become arrogant. In my mind, speaking only as it applies to me, there is a fine line between arrogance and self confidence. Others enjoy the attribute of confidence, but abhor arrogance, especially in my line of work. So, I constantly need to "police" myself to remain humble, or I will surely make a fool of myself. However, at my age, I know what I believe, and why I believe it, the same as you. We reached these conclusions based on our own core values, that are not static. These core values are added to, rearranged, and changed by the experiences we live. I think people look for those who agree with them out of a sense of belonging to something bigger than themselves. We also look for opposing points of view to see whether we are missing an opportunity to learn, or add to our repertoire of ideas of 'why' things are the way they are. You and I have agreed to disagree, but I truly believe there is a mutual respect for one another's principles, and the ability to discuss them without becoming angry. I am not a fast thinker, but I try to be thorough, so it takes time. My ambiguous statement was not intentionally ambiguous, and certainly was not meant to accuse you of arrogance. My apologies for not taking the time to speak clearly.

[accordn2me]

<snipped>

I don't ever recall reading in the King's english, "Thou Shalt Not Visit Thy Physician." In fact, I don't remember there being any biblical support for not going to a doctor. One of the Apostles himself was a physician. If you have any support biblically for not seeing a doctor, please share it.... and I say that with sincerity. You do raise a good point with the issue of faith healing.<snipped>
ALLMO,
RThere are some churches that discourage modern medicine. I'm not sure, but this maybe the scripture they use to support this, IMO misguided, belief:

from The Letter of James (Jesus' brother) 5:14-15 Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven.

[The R]

There are some churches that discourage modern medicine. I'm not sure, but this maybe the scripture they use to support this, IMO misguided, belief:

from The Letter of James (Jesus' brother) 5:14-15 Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven.


Good point on the churches that discourage the use of modern medicine; I prefer to call those churches cults in most instances. But they do exist as you say. I imagine 'faith' healing was more commonplace back in the days of Jesus, and I'd also imagine that there weren't as many physicians available. The physicians were probably in or around cities for the most part which in turn would require the people to rely on faith healing a bit more? Just a guess on my part obviously. I personally don't see any problem in praying for the sick today. The church I attend (a pretty conservative protestant one) does pray for our sick; in fact we do the same things for them as the scripture you referenced says to do. Of course we'd never encourage anyone to not see a doctor, I don't believe there's any scriptural basis for that.

ALLMO,
R

[Chocoholic]

There are some churches that discourage modern medicine. I'm not sure, but this maybe the scripture they use to support this, IMO misguided, belief:

from The Letter of James (Jesus' brother) 5:14-15 Are any among you sick? They should call for the elders of the church and have them pray over them, anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord. The prayer of faith will save the sick, and the Lord will raise them up; and anyone who has committed sins will be forgiven.

If I am to understand you correctly, you feel that some people may have a misguided beliefs even though it's written in your holy scriptures.

Who is to judge that those beliefs are misguided?

Some faiths believe that they shouldn't vote or take donations of blood. Others feel that they should have multiple wives. Others yet that priests must never marry. Are those "man's" interpretation of the bible?

[The R]

My comment was off the cuff, without a great deal of thought going into it. I made sense in my mind, because I know myself. It was meant to indirectly compliment you on your ability to know what you believe without input from other sources. I have a tendency to become arrogant. In my mind, speaking only as it applies to me, there is a fine line between arrogance and self confidence. Others enjoy the attribute of confidence, but abhor arrogance, especially in my line of work. So, I constantly need to "police" myself to remain humble, or I will surely make a fool of myself. However, at my age, I know what I believe, and why I believe it, the same as you. We reached these conclusions based on our own core values, that are not static. These core values are added to, rearranged, and changed by the experiences we live. I think people look for those who agree with them out of a sense of belonging to something bigger than themselves. We also look for opposing points of view to see whether we are missing an opportunity to learn, or add to our repertoire of ideas of 'why' things are the way they are. You and I have agreed to disagree, but I truly believe there is a mutual respect for one another's principles, and the ability to discuss them without becoming angry. I am not a fast thinker, but I try to be thorough, so it takes time. My ambiguous statement was not intentionally ambiguous, and certainly was not meant to accuse you of arrogance. My apologies for not taking the time to speak clearly.



You have no need to apologize or feel as if you've been arrogant or have ac