Monday, March 21, 2005
victor:
talking about the death penalty, I am just wondering if there are any of you out there for it? I am very ambivalent about most things in my life but I feel strongly against the use of the death penalty. I suppose it stems from my nature but I just dont think killing someone for crimes they have commited is helping anyone. I think that there is always room for reform and repentance. Taking a life away is terminating all the chances for that individual to set things right and what about those wrongly accused... life is not something we can freely give back to those we have executed. Well, most of the world has the right idea about it... I just dont think we do.
¶ 12:16 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Yeah, I'm pretty much with you on this one. I think of death as the easy way out, hehe. Let 'em sit in a jail cell for the rest of their lives and have a good chance to think about what they've done. Maybe they'll come around and ask God for forgiveness.
"Taking a life away is terminating all the chances for that individual to set things right..." but if they killed someone will they ever be able to "set things right," and what about the rights of the victims. What if it was your daughter and grandchild that had been killed. Or what if it was your mother who was brutally beaten and raped? It may not help anyone who was hurt by the senseless murder that was committed, but what about the number of times a murderer is set loose for one reason or another and does it again? Again, what if it was one you loved.....
# posted by 
: 12:39 AM
: 12:39 AM
Thanks, anonymous. I usually don't throw Bible verses around in my debates, but in this case, I will. To you I say,
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other on to him as well." -Matthew Ch. 5, vs 38-39
and "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect." -Matthew Ch. 5, vs 43-48
The point I'm trying to make here is that if you look at it from a Christian standpoint (those verses are straight from the mouth of Jesus at the Sermon on the Mount, btw... according to Matthew of course, heh), then we are supposed to simply show compassion - rather than vengeance - on those who harm us. Yes, I know I would be hard-pressed to not show bitterness towards someone who harmed a loved one of mine, and I feel the utmost pity for those who have had thier loved ones harmed. However, murder is still murder, whether it be done out of hatred or "justice". And though they "deserve it" because they murdered first, I still feel that two wrongs do NOT make a right. How are we any better than murderers when we condemn someone to death? That makes us guilty of the same sin they've commited. If we show them compassion and forgiveness, then perhaps they will see the light of God within us and be swayed to repent. And if not, then when they stand before God in the end, they will receive their just punishment. But it is GOD'S place to judge them... NOT OURS.
"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you." Matthew, Ch 7, vs 1-2
I will close with this simple lesson that I was taught while growing up: human nature tells us to exact vengeance... but the way to divinity teaches us compassion.
I'm sorry for gettin a little preachy with this response... but it's something I feel rather strongly about. Hope I helped to shed some light on a new viewpoint, anonymous. Let me know what you think, heh.
"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, offer no resistance to one who is evil. When someone strikes you on your right cheek, turn the other on to him as well." -Matthew Ch. 5, vs 38-39
and "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your heavenly Father, for he makes his sun rise on the bad and the good, and causes rain to fall on the just and the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what recompense will you have? Do not the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brothers only, what is unusual about that? Do not the pagans do the same? So be perfect, just as your heavenly Father is perfect." -Matthew Ch. 5, vs 43-48
The point I'm trying to make here is that if you look at it from a Christian standpoint (those verses are straight from the mouth of Jesus at the Sermon on the Mount, btw... according to Matthew of course, heh), then we are supposed to simply show compassion - rather than vengeance - on those who harm us. Yes, I know I would be hard-pressed to not show bitterness towards someone who harmed a loved one of mine, and I feel the utmost pity for those who have had thier loved ones harmed. However, murder is still murder, whether it be done out of hatred or "justice". And though they "deserve it" because they murdered first, I still feel that two wrongs do NOT make a right. How are we any better than murderers when we condemn someone to death? That makes us guilty of the same sin they've commited. If we show them compassion and forgiveness, then perhaps they will see the light of God within us and be swayed to repent. And if not, then when they stand before God in the end, they will receive their just punishment. But it is GOD'S place to judge them... NOT OURS.
"Stop judging, that you may not be judged. For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you." Matthew, Ch 7, vs 1-2
I will close with this simple lesson that I was taught while growing up: human nature tells us to exact vengeance... but the way to divinity teaches us compassion.
I'm sorry for gettin a little preachy with this response... but it's something I feel rather strongly about. Hope I helped to shed some light on a new viewpoint, anonymous. Let me know what you think, heh.
This is probably going to sound extremely familiar (previous conversation), but that's okay. I couldn't go without posting it. This is not directly in reference to your post, but semi-connected.
The words you used are spoken directly by Jesus, but Jesus' purpose was not to judge others. If he had tried to condone capital punishment (which was certainly alive and well in those days), he would have been stepping into the wrong realm. Captial punishment was placed (by God) under the governing authorities. Jesus never put on the robes of authority and sentenced people because under Roman rule, Jews did not have the right to pronounce death to anyone. If Jesus had said "stone him or her" (as in the case of the adulteress), he would have been arrested for rebellion (interesting piece of history). I'm not saying that I think Jesus would have been afraid to express his opinion anyway, but it was interesting none-the-less.
I know you didn't use this passage, but it kind of fits with what I was talking about. "If any of you be without guilt, let him cast the first stone." Can you imagine if we tried to use that in our courts today? No one would ever decide anything because who is without guilt? I think it's a good principle to live by in everyday life, but not sure it works in the judicial system. :-D
The words you used are spoken directly by Jesus, but Jesus' purpose was not to judge others. If he had tried to condone capital punishment (which was certainly alive and well in those days), he would have been stepping into the wrong realm. Captial punishment was placed (by God) under the governing authorities. Jesus never put on the robes of authority and sentenced people because under Roman rule, Jews did not have the right to pronounce death to anyone. If Jesus had said "stone him or her" (as in the case of the adulteress), he would have been arrested for rebellion (interesting piece of history). I'm not saying that I think Jesus would have been afraid to express his opinion anyway, but it was interesting none-the-less.
I know you didn't use this passage, but it kind of fits with what I was talking about. "If any of you be without guilt, let him cast the first stone." Can you imagine if we tried to use that in our courts today? No one would ever decide anything because who is without guilt? I think it's a good principle to live by in everyday life, but not sure it works in the judicial system. :-D
Ah, yes... but keep in mind that the Romans were also pagans at that point and time. Not only were they not Christian, but they let any of their territories believe in whatever they wanted to as far as religion goes (which is why they had a hard time putting Jesus to death without finding guilt of wrong-doing in him). As long as you followed Roman law, you were ok in their eyes.
My point is... yeah, of course the Romans put people to death in order to keep fairness and equality going... But they were not yet under the sway of Jesus' pacifist teachings, so saw no wrong in doing it. Although the Holy Roman Empire didn't really have a clue, either, I don't think ;) But whatever :)
My point is... yeah, of course the Romans put people to death in order to keep fairness and equality going... But they were not yet under the sway of Jesus' pacifist teachings, so saw no wrong in doing it. Although the Holy Roman Empire didn't really have a clue, either, I don't think ;) But whatever :)
"Our fate as the same as theirs..." well, if it is we should have another... 800 years to go and we better keep our eyes out for those Canadians, who are starting to have a strange resembelence to the barbaric Goths who over ran the eastern empire. Oh that Canada, once they run out of cows from the mad cow diesease they will start pillaging our northern townsships.
hahahaha... It's funny that you say that, Victor... We just started studying Charlemagne in Civ I, today (roughly the time period when the Goths, Saxons, Huns, etc. "migrated" into Christian Europe).
An interesting point was made by our professor concerning war and the Christian faith. If Jesus preached peace, how did Christianity become militaristic (Charlemagne, the Crusades, modern day)? Well, Charlemagne was born Christian, but he had 4 wives and some concubines. That doesn't sound very Christian, does it? It's not; it's a Frankish custom. However, he still attended church several times a day and did many acts of charity over his life. But when the Franks converted to Christianity, they didn't do away with all of their customs, which is why he was allowed so many wives.
It has been suggested that the Germanic Tribes could be (at least, in part) responsible for Christianity's militaristic turn. The tribes had always been very militaristic throughout history, so when they migrated and converted to Christianity, they just simply didn't do away with their customs of warfare. Seeing as how the tribes overran a good chunk of Europe (at least the parts that most Americans come from), their customs would, of course, be passed down unto us and modern day Europe, which would explain the widespread acceptance of war as "inevitable" in today's society.
Just another interesting point it thought I'd throw out ;)
Post a Comment
An interesting point was made by our professor concerning war and the Christian faith. If Jesus preached peace, how did Christianity become militaristic (Charlemagne, the Crusades, modern day)? Well, Charlemagne was born Christian, but he had 4 wives and some concubines. That doesn't sound very Christian, does it? It's not; it's a Frankish custom. However, he still attended church several times a day and did many acts of charity over his life. But when the Franks converted to Christianity, they didn't do away with all of their customs, which is why he was allowed so many wives.
It has been suggested that the Germanic Tribes could be (at least, in part) responsible for Christianity's militaristic turn. The tribes had always been very militaristic throughout history, so when they migrated and converted to Christianity, they just simply didn't do away with their customs of warfare. Seeing as how the tribes overran a good chunk of Europe (at least the parts that most Americans come from), their customs would, of course, be passed down unto us and modern day Europe, which would explain the widespread acceptance of war as "inevitable" in today's society.
Just another interesting point it thought I'd throw out ;)
<< Home
