|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 12:34:54 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: upNORTder
And how do you resurrect the poor innocent executed man?
How many of those can you name or is this just a hypothetical question, unlike actual murder victims?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 2:24:55 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
As far as I can see, and again I will try to find time to dig up scripture about this, but God hold life sacred, and the spilling of our life-blood a most grevious offense. HE has always called for the death penalty for the crime of murder(an individual killing an innocent). I do not know of an exception in scripture.
In Genesis 4, Cain seemingly murdered Abel and was banished rather than being executed. Rather than call for the death penalty, God explicitly protected Cain's life, to make sure no one else killed Cain, either.
Arguably Moses got away with murder in Exodus 2, certainly under Egyptian law and the broad Genesis 9 statement if not the later Israelite law, and we accept that he was not required to die.
In 2 Samuel 11, David murdered Bathsheba's husband so that he could have her for himself (adultery and murder, both of which were capital crimes at the time). He was not subject to the legal penalty for these actions.
I'm not sure if there are other cases or not. I can't think of any at the moment.
God also set down laws calling for execution for a number of other crimes which today we don't regard as worthy of capital punishment. I can justify no longer doing so on a variety of grounds, principally because we are no longer a nation-state directly under God as Israel was. But what grounds are used to justify picking and choosing which capital crimes still apply?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 2:36:29 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cloak
The Bible did NOT promise us a rosy, easy or fair life, but God IS JUST and good and If we forgive, He can be our advocate and seek revenge for us as He promised us in the Bible.
The Bible Definitely doesn't promise murderes a rosy, easy life.
You have NO right to forgive someone when they have murdered another person's loved one. YOU have to be wronged in order to forgive.
God tells us both in the OT and NT that He set up government to carry out justice within it's jurisdiction. It was God who prescribed execution for murderers. Who are you to tell us to ignore His instructions so you may have a warm-fuzzy feeling?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 2:39:57 PM
|
|
|
Cloak
Posts: 4674
Joined: 1/4/2008
From: Canada
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: JimboFletch
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cloak
The Bible did NOT promise us a rosy, easy or fair life, but God IS JUST and good and If we forgive, He can be our advocate and seek revenge for us as He promised us in the Bible.
God tells us both in the OT and NT that He set up government to carry out justice within it's jurisdiction. It was God who prescribed execution for murderers. Who are you to tell us to ignore His instructions so you may have a warm-fuzzy feeling?
Do you have a biblical verse(s) to support your sentence about this?
_____________________________
Blessings!
And My God shall meet ALL Your Needs according to His glorious riches in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4: 19)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 2:47:00 PM
|
|
|
JimboFletch
Posts: 6614
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cloak
Do you have a biblical verse(s) to support your sentence about this?
Have you followed this whole thread or just pop in now and again to accuse people of being hypocrites or pretenders?
If you have read the Bible a few times through, this shouldn't be news to you...
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 8:53:27 PM
|
|
|
upNORTder
Posts: 219
Joined: 7/20/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
You have NO right to forgive someone when they have murdered another person's loved one.
Does God?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 9:24:11 PM
|
|
|
HisFish
Posts: 612
Joined: 8/3/2005
From: Rocky mountain way
Status: offline
|
quote:
I am SO Disappointed, no wonder Not so many people want to become Christians!
Ya, that must be why people dont want to be christian, because we advocate justice, uh huh, you betcha.
< Message edited by HisFish -- 6/13/2008 9:31:55 PM >
_____________________________
The theology of the present aims at the deification of man, but the truth of all time
magnifies God . C. H. Spurgeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 9:30:12 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: upNORTder
And how do you resurrect the poor innocent executed man?
You can't...
quote:
Has anyone "in the system" ever been executed for killing an innocent suspect?
I have no idea...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 9:42:10 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiat_lux
God also set down laws calling for execution for a number of other crimes which today we don't regard as worthy of capital punishment. I can justify no longer doing so on a variety of grounds, principally because we are no longer a nation-state directly under God as Israel was. But what grounds are used to justify picking and choosing which capital crimes still apply?
Romans 13 knocks down the idea that only a nation-state directly under God as Israel concept...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/13/2008 9:44:52 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Cloak
The Bible did NOT promise us a rosy, easy or fair life, but God IS JUST and good and If we forgive, He can be our advocate and seek revenge for us as He promised us in the Bible.
And what is the means God ordained to do so?
Romans 13
1. 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. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt 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, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 5:17:45 PM
|
|
|
Neal2
Posts: 11
Joined: 6/16/2008
Status: offline
|
I'm curious to know whether or not you think everyone deserves the "right" (or priviledge) to kill someone that has murdered before.
In any event, I feel this is somewhat a U.S. versus non-U.S. debate (since from what I'm getting, the Bible doesn't say it's wrong to *not* have a death penalty). Just that it was okay (but not mandatory) to have 1. Therefore, Christians might be split.
But I'm not someone who cares for or wants much revenge, so..
Neal C.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 5:31:10 PM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2918
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
Punishment is not revenge. If it is, then no one should even receive a traffic ticket if he/she runs a stop sign and kills someone. Further, no child should ever feel the consequences of wrong behavior for anything since it would be exacting vengeance to punish for the offense. Sound absurd? It's the logical conclusion of punishment being equated with vengeance.
_____________________________
may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so you will abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit. Romans 15:13
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 6:34:37 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
Romans 13 knocks down the idea that only a nation-state directly under God as Israel concept...
I've discussed Romans 13 already in this thread. However, if you're correct that our nations today are under God in the same way Israel does, then my question remains: how does one choose judiciously which crimes do and don't merit the death penalty, since we're not actually using the laws given to God by Israel? Or do you suppose our nations should establish a legal system precisely as that given in the Torah?
Briefly, my previous observations on the verses in question begin with context - Paul is writing to Christians about government as something else, something not Christian, that we as Christians must relate to. Romans 12-13 is about a set of people we relate to who on first glance might seem our enemies and therefore worthy of harsh treatment, and Paul's general argument is that we must treat our enemies, including the state, with love and grace. Consider further that Paul would well know the government uses the sword for things that are not good, since the government of the time was using the sword against Christians, eventually including himself. So I don't think Romans 13 gives us the clarity you're looking for.
What's more, given the context, Romans 13 merely says that states can execute people - but the question here is whether I as a Christian would support a death penalty. Romans 13 doesn't say what states must do, it only loosely even suggests what they should do, so I think there is considerable leeway on what opinion we ought to have about the death penalty. The verse certainly seems to leave open permission for a government to use force, even lethal force, but it does not say what a Christian should do in such a situation. In 1 Corinthians 6, Paul notes that while everything may be "permissible," not everything is beneficial or advisable. Personally, I believe that both Paul's and in fact Jesus's admonition to love even my enemies, and to repay evil with good, means that I may not kill a murderer as he or she has killed someone else. The fact that I don the cloak of the state does not give me the power to do something that as an individual servant of Christ I would not already do, and since I would not kill someone in the service of Christ, I certainly would not kill someone in the service of one of the powers of this world.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 6:56:26 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiat_lux
I've discussed Romans 13 already in this thread. However, if you're correct that our nations today are under God in the same way Israel does, then my question remains: how does one choose judiciously which crimes do and don't merit the death penalty, since we're not actually using the laws given to God by Israel? Or do you suppose our nations should establish a legal system precisely as that given in the Torah?
I am not saying we are a nation under God in the same way Israel was, but that the context of Roman 13 gives the civil government the authority to take life, and the bible is rather clear that the just punishment for murder is death.
quote:
Briefly, my previous observations on the verses in question begin with context - Paul is writing to Christians about government as something else, something not Christian, that we as Christians must relate to.
Paul's writings made it clear the civil government is ordained by God for His purpose, that being order...
quote:
Romans 12-13 is about a set of people we relate to who on first glance might seem our enemies and therefore worthy of harsh treatment, and Paul's general argument is that we must treat our enemies, including the state, with love and grace. Consider further that Paul would well know the government uses the sword for things that are not good, since the government of the time was using the sword against Christians, eventually including himself. So I don't think Romans 13 gives us the clarity you're looking for.
Romans 13 couldn't be more clear...
Romans 13
1. 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. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt 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, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
quote:
What's more, given the context, Romans 13 merely says that states can execute people - but the question here is whether I as a Christian would support a death penalty Romans 13 doesn't say what states must do, it only loosely even suggests what they should do, so I think there is considerable leeway on what opinion we ought to have about the death penalty.
There is nothing in the bible to say the death penalty is not just... It calls for it for various sins/crimes... In the context of this thread we are talking about the unlawful taking of life and the bible is painfully clear the just punishment for murder is death at the hands of the civil government, ordained by God for that very purpose...
quote:
The verse certainly seems to leave open permission for a government to use force, even lethal force, but it does not say what a Christian should do in such a situation.
Christian should support what is just and righteous... And the death penalty for murder is just and righteous...
quote:
In 1 Corinthians 6, Paul notes that while everything may be "permissible," not everything is beneficial or advisable. Personally, I believe that both Paul's and in fact Jesus's admonition to love even my enemies, and to repay evil with good, means that I may not kill a murderer as he or she has killed someone else.
Just punishment cannot be repaying evil for evil by nature... One can show love to the person who murdered and still justly put them to death... As for YOU killing a someone who murdered someone, of course YOU can't unless the authority hasn't been granted to you... And Christ made it clear to Pilate the origin of the athority is God...
quote:
The fact that I don the cloak of the state does not give me the power to do something that as an individual servant of Christ I would not already do, and since I would not kill someone in the service of Christ, I certainly would not kill someone in the service of one of the powers of this world.
Many men of God, and or Christ killed in His name, by His command and there isn't a hint of evil in their actions... As righteous as if they gave the person a drink of water... It's not against God's law to put a convicted person to death for his or her deeds, in fact you'd have a uphill battle to not carry out the just punishment for the deed...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 7:41:06 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
I am not saying we are a nation under God in the same way Israel was, but that the context of Roman 13 gives the civil government the authority to take life, and the bible is rather clear that the just punishment for murder is death.
The Bible is clear on that point in the context of a legal system we haven't actually implemented in our own society. Leading to my curiosity about how we decide which parts of that legal system are worth implementing and which aren't.
Furthermore, outside of that particular legal system, which as I say we haven't implemented, I'm really not sure the Bible is as clear as you suggest. God doesn't have Cain executed, for example - in fact, he protects Cain. God doesn't seem to expect David to be executed either, yet David was a murderer (not to mention an adulterer, a crime which also called for death). Arguably Moses was a murderer too.
quote:
Paul's writings made it clear the civil government is ordained by God for His purpose, that being order...
If we're going to simply repeat talking points back and forth, I can do that too. I would welcome more substantive criticism, though, if you think - as I assume you do - that my interpretation is incorrect.
Plus, it's a fairly dangerous thing to base an entire philosophy of government on a single passage. I could do much the same with 1 Samuel 8, for example, and come to a completely opposite point of view on government than the one you have from Romans 13.
I'll say again, Romans 13 says what a non-Christian government can do. It doesn't say what a government should do with respect to deciding who is and is not to die, nor does it say what a Christian should think or do when in a position of authority over such matters.
quote:
There is nothing in the bible to say the death penalty is not just... It calls for it for various sins/crimes... In the context of this thread we are talking about the unlawful taking of life and the bible is painfully clear the just punishment for murder is death at the hands of the civil government, ordained by God for that very purpose...
Technically, the original post didn't explicitly limit the field to murder. Even if it did, however, I think my points would still stand. One can't use the Old Testament law to justify execution for murder if one isn't prepared to use the the same law to justify execution for other offences.
quote:
Many men of God, and or Christ killed in His name, by His command and there isn't a hint of evil in their actions... As righteous as if they gave the person a drink of water... It's not against God's law to put a convicted person to death for his or her deeds, in fact you'd have a uphill battle to not carry out the just punishment for the deed...
First off, I really can't agree that killing someone is as righteous as giving them a drink of water - for me, at any rate; for others at other times, and particularly for the Israelites under the older covenant, different orders were given and different decisions obviously could be made. In Romans 12:20, Paul says that if our enemy is hungry, we should feed him; and if he is thirsty, we should give him water. He does not then add, "and if he is guilty, kill him," as though the three are equivalent. Rather he says that we are to be kind to him and in so doing "heap burning coals on his head," i.e. punishment will occur later, by the hand of God. I take this to mean that we as Christians are not meant to be instruments of punishment to our enemies. And in my opinion, that Christian calling trumps any "authority" the state chooses to bestow upon me.
Moreover, this is my interpretation of the expectations that God has laid upon my life. I trust that my sisters and brothers in Christ also have their own interpretations and can justify them at need.
The philosophy of government described in Romans 13, and indirectly referenced by Jesus in the passage you cite, is one that assumes the government and its officials are not Christian, and claim to hold the power of persecution over Christians - and in the first instance, over Christ. The response to such power is to declare that the state does not actually have such power in its own right, but that it is permitted to act as it does by God. In my opinion these statements say nothing about what Christians ought to do if they are placed in the position to potentially make or carry out such decisions - and we are today, if at least in the sense that we live in representative or democratic societies. And what I am saying is that I could not kill a person, even with this supposed "authority" of the state, because it would not be compatible with what I view as a call to Christians to love and be gracious to even our enemies.
Edited to add; --
quote:
Romans 13 couldn't be more clear...
Romans 13
1. 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. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt 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, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
I'm afraid it's rather less clear than you suggest. History is full of examples where governments didn't give "praise" to those who did good works, but rather persecuted them. Many governments have "legally" executed Christians, for example, sometimes today and certainly in history. I conclude therefore that, unless we are simply to assume Paul was wrong when he wrote this (and I'm not prepared to do that), he clearly is attempting to teach something different. For that I suggested reading into the broader context, which begins, in my opinion, in chapter 12.
< Message edited by fiat_lux -- 6/16/2008 7:57:10 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 8:35:56 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: fiat_lux
Furthermore, outside of that particular legal system, which as I say we haven't implemented, I'm really not sure the Bible is as clear as you suggest. God doesn't have Cain executed, for example - in fact, he protects Cain. God doesn't seem to expect David to be executed either, yet David was a murderer (not to mention an adulterer, a crime which also called for death). Arguably Moses was a murderer too.
God granting pardons so to speak is well wiithin His rights and surely covered by the truth this His ways are higher than ours... We do not have the luxuary of having the mind of God so we deal with folks on a another level as God decreed...
quote:
If we're going to simply repeat talking points back and forth, I can do that too. I would welcome more substantive criticism, though, if you think - as I assume you do - that my interpretation is incorrect.
If you want some long bloated post about what most theologinas agree on you should look elsewhere... I can post Peter's words(that directly supports Paul's, loads of OT scripture about nations, rulers and what should be...
quote:
Plus, it's a fairly dangerous thing to base an entire philosophy of government on a single passage.
Assumption...
quote:
I could do much the same with 1 Samuel 8, for example, and come to a completely opposite point of view on government than the one you have from Romans 13.
I am sure you could... You cite Romans 13 and come to a completely opposite point of view...
quote:
I'll say again, Romans 13 says what a non-Christian government can do.
It plainly says God ordain civil goverments, as states in the verse; for he(the civil government) is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
quote:
It doesn't say what a government should do with respect to deciding who is and is not to die, nor does it say what a Christian should think or do when in a position of authority over such matters.
Give God ordained it for the sake of order and it has a clear ordained(by God) purpose so if the civil government acts in a just manner it should be clear what a Christain should do...
quote:
Technically, the original post didn't explicitly limit the field to murder. Even if it did, however, I think my points would still stand. One can't use the Old Testament law to justify execution for murder if one isn't prepared to use the the same law to justify execution for other offences.
What says I can't point out that the bible clearly states the just punishment for murder is death... The state doesn't have to put folks to death for everything the bible calls for in order to put folks to death for murder... That's your personal criteria...
quote:
In Romans 12:20, Paul says that if our enemy is hungry, we should feed him; and if he is thirsty, we should give him water. He does not then add, "and if he is guilty, kill him," as though the three are equivalent.Rather he says that we are to be kind to him and in so doing "heap burning coals on his head," i.e. punishment will occur later, by the hand of God. I take this to mean that we as Christians are not meant to be instruments of punishment to our enemies.
One can deal with the "bad guy" in civil manner and still deliver a just punishment...
The fact that Christians have been instruments of punishment I believe that your belief on this matter is personal in nature...
quote:
And in my opinion, that Christian calling trumps any "authority" the state chooses to bestow upon me.
It's not the state the ultimately grants you "authority" but God, as Jesus plainly tells Pilate in regards to Pilates idea that he and the Roman government was the origin of Pilate's power… Jesus plainly tells him that authority is granted by God...
quote:
The philosophy of government described in Romans 13, and indirectly referenced by Jesus in the passage you cite, is one that assumes the government and its officials are not Christian, and claim to hold the power of persecution over Christians - and in the first instance, over Christ.
That's a rather large assumption to state that officials are not or better yet cannot be Christian... While not an offical, Paul had Roman citizenship and even invokes his rights when he was beaten...
quote:
In my opinion these statements say nothing about what Christians ought to do if they are placed in the position to potentially make or carry out such decisions - and we are today, if at least in the sense that we live in representative or democratic societies.
The bible is quite clear we are to obey the laws of the land that are not in conflict with God's law... There is NOTHING in colflict with God's law when the state justly puts a person to death for murder...
quote:
And what I am saying is that I could not kill a person, even with this supposed "authority" of the state, because it would not be compatible with what I view as a call to Christians to love and be gracious to even our enemies.
The above directly implies that justly dealing with someone in regards to their deeds is not Christ like, yet taken out to its logical conclusion you can't help put point your finger at God...
You can and should treat even the most heinous person with a level of respect and love, all the while you can as well carry out God's command... His people did so, so we know it can and did happen...
quote:
I'm afraid it's rather less clear than you suggest. History is full of examples where governments didn't give "praise" to those who did good works, but rather persecuted them.
The evil acts of governments cannot diminish what God ordained them to do...
quote:
Many governments have "legally" executed Christians, for example, sometimes today and certainly in history.
Doesn't remove what God ordained... The actions of government do not dictate what God's word says... The context of Romans 13 in regards to what God ordained stands on its own, not on the right or wrong actions of governments...
quote:
I conclude therefore that, unless we are simply to assume Paul was wrong when he wrote this (and I'm not prepared to do that), he clearly is attempting to teach something different. For that I suggested reading into the broader context, which begins, in my opinion, in chapter 12.
Paul said if he did something worthy of death he'd have no problem with it so in my opinion you're on a wild goose chase...
John
< Message edited by SovereignIsHe -- 6/16/2008 8:42:26 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 9:48:34 PM
|
|
|
bzirk
Posts: 2918
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Where the deer and antelope play
Status: offline
|
I've scanned the posts, but I'm not going to read all of the exchanges, because frankly, I don't have time, and I doubt a lot of other people do as well.
The death penalty is not only within the Lord's teachings but He is in fact the author of it -- beginning with the consequences of the fall where the Lord issued a death penalty to everyone, and it still stands no matter someone's spiritual standing with Him.
_____________________________
may the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing, so you will abound in hope by the power of the Holy Spirit. Romans 15:13
Great quote: I just ain't God and don't know it all. -- SonInMe1
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/16/2008 11:05:37 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5511
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bzirk
I've scanned the posts, but I'm not going to read all of the exchanges, because frankly, I don't have time, and I doubt a lot of other people do as well.
The death penalty is not only within the Lord's teachings but He is in fact the author of it -- beginning with the consequences of the fall where the Lord issued a death penalty to everyone, and it still stands no matter someone's spiritual standing with Him.
Very good point...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/17/2008 2:29:59 PM
|
|
|
fiat_lux
Posts: 283
Joined: 5/21/2005
From: Ottawa
Status: offline
|
quote:
God granting pardons so to speak is well wiithin His rights and surely covered by the truth this His ways are higher than ours... We do not have the luxuary of having the mind of God so we deal with folks on a another level as God decreed...
You're right. And on the level I deal with them, I take the safer option by deciding in favour of life rather than in favour of death. God did not explicitly grant "pardons" in any of those cases - it's just that the question of killing them never came up. Indeed, he seemed to expect that others would want to execute Cain, and agreed to protect Cain, but apparently didn't tell anyone else about this "pardon," as you describe it.
If you acknowledge that in some cases God may in fact wish someone to live, how will you or I determine in what case this may or may not apply? Personally I prefer to err on the side of caution where human life is concerned.
quote:
If you want some long bloated post about what most theologinas agree on you should look elsewhere... I can post Peter's words(that directly supports Paul's, loads of OT scripture about nations, rulers and what should be...
I do look elsewhere and find the subject equally unresolved. And again, as I've said, the OT scripture related to a specific relationship between Israel and God. Even if we were to take Romans 13 as you have taken it, the Israel-God relationship went far beyond that. I don't remember seeing anything in the OT about a standard of behaviour for governments in general.
There may of course be such a standard, in which case I invite correction.
quote:
quote:
Plus, it's a fairly dangerous thing to base an entire philosophy of government on a single passage.
Assumption...
An assumption that we shouldn't base an entire philosophy of government on a single passage? Or an assumption that it's only a single passage?
When such questions as these are asked, people almost invariably turn to Romans 13 and generalize from there.
quote:
quote:
I could do much the same with 1 Samuel 8, for example, and come to a completely opposite point of view on government than the one you have from Romans 13.
I am sure you could... You cite Romans 13 and come to a completely opposite point of view...
That's because I'm trying to harmonize what at first glance seem to be divergent teachings. In 1 Samuel 8, for example, God explicitly describes the creation of a government in Israel as a rejection of him.
quote:
Give God ordained it for the sake of order and it has a clear ordained(by God) purpose so if the civil government acts in a just manner it should be clear what a Christain should do...
At most the purpose is to maintain order. Precisely how the government goes about maintaining order is unclear, except that part of doing so is that the government possesses a sword. This then leads us into a discussion, presumably, of in which cases the sword is justified and in which it is not, which leads to your objection that:
quote:
What says I can't point out that the bible clearly states the just punishment for murder is death... The state doesn't have to put folks to death for everything the bible calls for in order to put folks to death for murder... That's your personal criteria...
The problem is, you've decided that because the Bible says the government to put to death murderers, therefore it's okay for the government to do only that. But my point is that we have to look at the Biblical law, if we're going to look at the Old Testament, and Paul, for one, is pretty clear that we can't just arbitrarily pick and choose which laws to follow and which ones not to. So, if as you suggest, morality and obligation demand that governments put to death murderers, then by the same token morality and obligation demand that governments put to death offenders under a variety of other Old Testament laws. Now, if that's in fact your position, then I withdraw my objection.
The Roman empire, under which Paul was writing, prescribed the death penalty for a variety of offences other than murder. I suppose we could object if some of those were brought up today, too - but under the principles of Romans 13, you're basically saying you wouldn't object to the government punishing anyone for anything, since Romans 13 doesn't provide an outlet for opposing an unjust government. At least according to your interpretation.
quote:
quote:The philosophy of government described in Romans 13, and indirectly referenced by Jesus in the passage you cite, is one that assumes the government and its officials are not Christian, and claim to hold the power of persecution over Christians - and in the first instance, over Christ.
That's a rather large assumption to state that officials are not or better yet cannot be Christian... While not an offical, Paul had Roman citizenship and even invokes his rights when he was beaten...
It's not an assumption at all. The plain fact of the matter is that when Paul wrote Romans 13, he was writing about a Roman government which was not Christian, and he was writing to Roman Christians who were not in government. It's for this reason that I say that Paul writes, he writes about us as Christians relating to a non-Christian government. So perhaps the precise teaching in Romans 13 wouldn't apply to us, for example, who live in a very different political system and do have some political influence, at least in terms of voting. There is, however, a very great difference between Paul's question in Acts 24-25, which you note - that is, that we should submit to the government even if the penalty for doing so is death - and the question I thought was asked, which was whether, as a Christian, we support the death penalty in our societies. Submission and support are rather different creatures.
Unfortunately, no one seems to have asked Paul, or Peter for that matter, to deliver advice on how a Christian should react when he is in a position of political power, or acting as an agent of the state, because as they wrote no Christians were in such positions. This doesn't mean they were teaching something that is wrong, just that they were teaching in a different context. Romans 13 says governments may do things in order to maintain order. The moral yardstick for what those "things" may be is absent. We could, I guess, discuss adopting the Old Testament law as that yardstick, but I doubt you or I would be willing to do that, either.
Paul's proclamations of his rights, furthermore, may or may not have been a good thing in all circumstances. In Acts 26, for example, he might have been set free to continue his preaching, but he appealed to Caesar - according to his rights as a Roman - and therefore had to be kept in captivity. As it happened, Paul was able to take advantage of the situation anyways by resuming his ministry while under house arrest in Rome.
quote:
The above directly implies that justly dealing with someone in regards to their deeds is not Christ like, yet taken out to its logical conclusion you can't help put point your finger at God...
You can and should treat even the most heinous person with a level of respect and love, all the while you can as well carry out God's command... His people did so, so we know it can and did happen...
In my opinion it is rather difficult to respect and love someone while I take their life from them. And Romans 12 tells me not to deal with someone "in regards to their deeds," at least if I understand what you mean here correctly, but rather to love and care for them regardless. It is God's to "avenge" and "repay" and so on.
I'm not pointing fingers at anyone. God is God. He has powers and privileges that I do not. I accept this.
quote:
quote:
I'm afraid it's rather less clear than you suggest. History is full of examples where governments didn't give "praise" to those who did good works, but rather persecuted them.
The evil acts of governments cannot diminish what God ordained them to do...
The difficulty is, the plain reading of Romans 13 as you've taken it seems to suggest that governments don't do such "evil" acts. For example, it states that "for rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong"; further, if one wants to be "free," one must "do what is right" and then the governments will "commend" you.
I have to assume that Paul is reasoning towards another end than a universal philosophy of government here, because I know that governments have punished those who "do good," and certainly haven't commended them, for example governments have punished and not commended people for being Christian. I have to interpret Romans 13 as leading in some other direction because otherwise I fear I would be in danger of calling the Bible wrong on this issue, and that I will not do.
quote:
quote:
Many governments have "legally" executed Christians, for example, sometimes today and certainly in history.
Doesn't remove what God ordained... The actions of government do not dictate what God's word says... The context of Romans 13 in regards to what God ordained stands on its own, not on the right or wrong actions of governments...
The context of Romans 13, as you have interpreted it, says that governments commend those who do good. It doesn't say governments should or might or even can commend those who do good; it says that governments do. This would not be a prescription for right behaviour; it would be an observation at most.
quote:
Paul said if he did something worthy of death he'd have no problem with it so in my opinion you're on a wild goose chase...
Paul said in Acts that if he was guilty of a crime worthy of death he was prepared to die.
He did not say, however, whether a Christian in the position of the governor ought to administer that death.
The question, and perhaps our difference (I say perhaps), may come down to how we interpret the question. If what you want me to acknowledge is that the Bible, and God, permits worldly governments to kill people, then yes, absolutely I agree that is so.
If the question, however, is whether I as a Christian, were I in such a position of authority should kill people, then in my opinion the answer is no. I would not, for example, consider my actions as right and blameless were I to kill Paul or even Jesus, yet both - along with plenty of other martyrs - were legally executed. In some posts you seem to be suggesting that the death penalty powers implied in Romans 13 are good specifically in the context of murder, but if that's the case, then I'm wondering on what Biblical basis we limit government powers only to murder cases.
< Message edited by fiat_lux -- 6/17/2008 2:37:48 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Death Penalty: For or Against? - 6/17/2008 2:42:48 PM
| | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
