Hey welcome ~ nice to have your first post answering my thread
If all human life is sacred then what else applies other than abortion & euthanasia~~does the sacredness maybe get forfeited like twistedsketch example with capital crime, or if in military during wartime?
The terms sacred and holy mean "set apart". More specifically they mean set apart for or to God.
There are two important aspects of this. First is that when something is set apart to God, it belongs to him. It is owned by him. Second is that when something is set apart to God, it is seperated from the secular. If it is reserved for God, it is seperated from the normal usage of the world, or 'daily life' etc.
Both terms, holy and sacred, are closely connected in their root forms, to the words for priest in the respective languages. The concept of the priest was a person whose life and occupation was set apart from secular life or secular occupation and was instead reserved for the service of God (or the gods in the pagan cultures). The words also applied to the objects used in worship, and the place of worship itself (temple) all were reserved specifically for the divine and were not to be used for anything else.
Now when it comes to applying these terms, holy and sacred, to all human life it presents some interesting questions.
Is all human life set apart to the service of God?
Is all human life devoted to the service of God?
Is all human life reserved for God and not to be used for anything else?
When the race of man was created he was sacred. Again there are a few different levels to consider.
First, Man was made in the image and likeness of God. This alone made man sacred. Anything that images God, or is like God is sacred because God is completely sacred.
Secondly, God made man and he gave man life from his own Spirit, thus man's life belongs to God and as such it is sacred.
Thirdly, the purpose for which man was created was to fellowship with God, to have communion with God, and thus man was set apart for relationship with God.
However, God also gave man independant will. Man had and has the ability to chose to use his life for other purposes than God's purposes, and to live apart from communion with God.
This is what happened in the fall.
So in a sense, the sacredness of man was damaged or obscured. It was not destroyed or completely done away with, however.
Despite the fall, mankind still carries the image and likeness of God, even if it is marred by sin.
Even after the fall, the life of man still belongs to God.
This is why murder in all forms is among the gravest sins. It is closely linked to blasphemy because it destroys what is sacred, and it is a crime against the image of God.
So, we are capable of denying the full sacredness of our own lives. The sacredness that God intended for us. But even when we do, we are still sacred by virture of God's image and likeness, and by virtue of the fact that our life belongs to God, no matter how we choose to use it.
Those aspects of sacredness can not be escaped or done away with. They are inalienable, and ultimately all of our other rights are linked to those in some way shape or form.
Now the natural question then is how can a Christian ever support war, or the death penalty, or how could a Christian kill even in self defense etc.
Many people would answer all those in the negative, but historic, traditional Christianity has not.
The answer to those questions is found in the fact that human life belongs to God and he has the right and the authority to give it or to take it. God at various points in scripture has delegated that right and that authority to specific human institutions, namely governments. This is true in both the old testament and the new testament.
In fact, God not only gave government the right and authority to take life, in some cases he actually mandated or required it.
Given what I know about God and of God, I believe that this is not only a satisfaction of his justice, but it is also an act of love, even for the person who's life is forfeit.
Self defence is also allowed by God, and again I would argue that far from being selfish, it is an act of love and duty.
Consider, if someone is trying to kill you unjustly, is it better for them to let them do it? In so doing you have allowed them to commit one of the worst sins possible and have allowed them to earn God's wrath.
Now, it is very possible that God may tell someone to give up their life because he knows that through such a sacrifice a greater good will come. But only God knows and only he can direct in that case.
Thanks Simon~I knew you'd be able to add something here; you've kinda underlined my thoughts on the somewhat "marred sacredness" of humanity and that at some point the inherent sacredness gifted upon humanity can be forfeited...IOW the expression:
I would answer that all human life is sacred in the sense that all human life comes to us as a gift from God and that, anything that is God-given, is necessarily sacred.
But I would also say that a lot of people (and I don't think Christians are an exception here) have trashed the sanctity of life both in themselves and in other people. And, of course, to take innocent life (such as that of an unborn child) may very well be the supreme example of trashing the holiness of life. And here's the catch: When we trash the holiness of human life, in others or in ourselves, we don't simply get away with it: we degrade our own consciences, we chip away at that holiness, we take the gift from God and rudely shove it back in His face. And then, even though God gave us the holy gift of human life, us people become filth rags. When we have to execute people who have just simply gone too far, we have to walk the fine line of 1)Realizing that the person was a creation of God's holiness and had the sanctity of life and of 2)Realizing that when people have truly gone evil, there is more evil in allowing them to continue than there is in getting rid of them (this is why Paxi supports the death penalty).
But all of us have allowed sin to strip away the holiness of God's gift - and this is why we need Jesus.
I would answer that all human life is sacred in the sense that all human life comes to us as a gift from God and that, anything that is God-given, is necessarily sacred.
But I would also say that a lot of people (and I don't think Christians are an exception here) have trashed the sanctity of life both in themselves and in other people. And, of course, to take innocent life (such as that of an unborn child) may very well be the supreme example of trashing the holiness of life. And here's the catch: When we trash the holiness of human life, in others or in ourselves, we don't simply get away with it: we degrade our own consciences, we chip away at that holiness, we take the gift from God and rudely shove it back in His face. And then, even though God gave us the holy gift of human life, us people become filth rags. When we have to execute people who have just simply gone too far, we have to walk the fine line of 1)Realizing that the person was a creation of God's holiness and had the sanctity of life and of 2)Realizing that when people have truly gone evil, there is more evil in allowing them to continue than there is in getting rid of them (this is why Paxi supports the death penalty).
But all of us have allowed sin to strip away the holiness of God's gift - and this is why we need Jesus.
Great points~I would differ with the death penalty issue, that's my inner mennonite showing through...evil is what it is~when there is life there is always hope for redemption
I do agree with that - that God can redeem anyone! There can always be forgiveness from God for anything (but I still think society needs to execute murderers and rapists). Indeed, God shows more mercy than humans do, or for that matter can... I can relate to what you are saying though... I was in the Evangelical Friends camp for many years and then attended a Mennonite Church for several years. I do think that we need to take capital punishment very seriously and not just frivously kill people. But it was actually on this issue that I left the Friends/Anabaptist camp, as I had to admit that as a parent if some sick freak did something horrible to my little girl, I would want that person to get the death penalty. Not necessarily be damned to hell... but yes, the death penalty.
Saying that, I openly admit that Jesus is probably a lot more merciful and forgiving than I am. That is why He is the Messiah and I'm not.
The terms sacred and holy mean "set apart". More specifically they mean set apart for or to God.
There are two important aspects of this. First is that when something is set apart to God, it belongs to him. It is owned by him. Second is that when something is set apart to God, it is seperated from the secular. If it is reserved for God, it is seperated from the normal usage of the world, or 'daily life' etc.
Both terms, holy and sacred, are closely connected in their root forms, to the words for priest in the respective languages. The concept of the priest was a person whose life and occupation was set apart from secular life or secular occupation and was instead reserved for the service of God (or the gods in the pagan cultures). The words also applied to the objects used in worship, and the place of worship itself (temple) all were reserved specifically for the divine and were not to be used for anything else.
Now when it comes to applying these terms, holy and sacred, to all human life it presents some interesting questions.
Is all human life set apart to the service of God?
Is all human life devoted to the service of God?
Is all human life reserved for God and not to be used for anything else?
When the race of man was created he was sacred. Again there are a few different levels to consider.
First, Man was made in the image and likeness of God. This alone made man sacred. Anything that images God, or is like God is sacred because God is completely sacred.
Secondly, God made man and he gave man life from his own Spirit, thus man's life belongs to God and as such it is sacred.
Thirdly, the purpose for which man was created was to fellowship with God, to have communion with God, and thus man was set apart for relationship with God.
However, God also gave man independant will. Man had and has the ability to chose to use his life for other purposes than God's purposes, and to live apart from communion with God.
This is what happened in the fall.
So in a sense, the sacredness of man was damaged or obscured. It was not destroyed or completely done away with, however.
Despite the fall, mankind still carries the image and likeness of God, even if it is marred by sin.
Even after the fall, the life of man still belongs to God.
This is why murder in all forms is among the gravest sins. It is closely linked to blasphemy because it destroys what is sacred, and it is a crime against the image of God.
So, we are capable of denying the full sacredness of our own lives. The sacredness that God intended for us. But even when we do, we are still sacred by virture of God's image and likeness, and by virtue of the fact that our life belongs to God, no matter how we choose to use it.
Those aspects of sacredness can not be escaped or done away with. They are inalienable, and ultimately all of our other rights are linked to those in some way shape or form.
Now the natural question then is how can a Christian ever support war, or the death penalty, or how could a Christian kill even in self defense etc.
Many people would answer all those in the negative, but historic, traditional Christianity has not.
The answer to those questions is found in the fact that human life belongs to God and he has the right and the authority to give it or to take it. God at various points in scripture has delegated that right and that authority to specific human institutions, namely governments. This is true in both the old testament and the new testament.
In fact, God not only gave government the right and authority to take life, in some cases he actually mandated or required it.
Given what I know about God and of God, I believe that this is not only a satisfaction of his justice, but it is also an act of love, even for the person who's life is forfeit.
Self defence is also allowed by God, and again I would argue that far from being selfish, it is an act of love and duty.
Consider, if someone is trying to kill you unjustly, is it better for them to let them do it? In so doing you have allowed them to commit one of the worst sins possible and have allowed them to earn God's wrath.
Now, it is very possible that God may tell someone to give up their life because he knows that through such a sacrifice a greater good will come. But only God knows and only he can direct in that case.
thank you Simon...this was truly helpful and answered some questions for me....
...and gave me an even deeper understanding of why God tells us to strive to be holy as He is holy.
__________________ Joh 16:33 These things I have spoken to you, that in Me you may have peace. In the world you will have tribulation; but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. <--I take myself very seriously...
I do agree with that - that God can redeem anyone! There can always be forgiveness from God for anything (but I still think society needs to execute murderers and rapists). Indeed, God shows more mercy than humans do, or for that matter can... I can relate to what you are saying though... I was in the Evangelical Friends camp for many years and then attended a Mennonite Church for several years. I do think that we need to take capital punishment very seriously and not just frivously kill people. But it was actually on this issue that I left the Friends/Anabaptist camp, as I had to admit that as a parent if some sick freak did something horrible to my little girl, I would want that person to get the death penalty. Not necessarily be damned to hell... but yes, the death penalty.
Saying that, I openly admit that Jesus is probably a lot more merciful and forgiving than I am. That is why He is the Messiah and I'm not.
thanks for the honesty, hope we never have to experience that stuff...
Innocent human lives definitely are. The lives of those who commit death penalty offenses, maybe they're not as sacred. They have after all, forfeited their right to life when they took the lives of innocents. How much this affects the sanctity of their lives, I'm not sure.
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. John 7:24
First we must decide whom created the death penalty offenses in this day and age? 'Elohim or mankind through laws they voted on and enacted? (I am not striving to debate Old Testament vs. New Testament).
Even though 'Elohim is the final judge, after a person is confined and taken from the public risk and locked away do we as believers have the right to condemn a person to death? What does that say about our hearts? After a person is confined, is not putting him to death an act of vengeance and/or retribution.
Personally I see a major difference in putting someone to death in the act of protecting someone else in the immediate tense, than putting someone to death years after they have been locked up a a form of punishment.
After a person lives a natural life in prison and dies unrepentant then it's between him and 'Elohim, but if we promote the death penalty then we take away that possibility of repentance. Reminds me of a verse.
When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but [that] rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed [his] hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye [to it]. Matthew 27:24
Does having a death penalty make us innocent from the blood of the convicted transgressor?
Judge not according to the appearance, but judge righteous judgment. John 7:24
First we must decide whom created the death penalty offenses in this day and age? 'Elohim or mankind through laws they voted on and enacted? (I am not striving to debate Old Testament vs. New Testament).
Even though 'Elohim is the final judge, after a person is confined and taken from the public risk and locked away do we as believers have the right to condemn a person to death? What does that say about our hearts? After a person is confined, is not putting him to death an act of vengeance and/or retribution.
Personally I see a major difference in putting someone to death in the act of protecting someone else in the immediate tense, than putting someone to death years after they have been locked up a a form of punishment.
After a person lives a natural life in prison and dies unrepentant then it's between him and 'Elohim, but if we promote the death penalty then we take away that possibility of repentance. Reminds me of a verse.
When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but [that] rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed [his] hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye [to it]. Matthew 27:24
Does having a death penalty make us innocent from the blood of the convicted transgressor?
God is the one who mandated the death penalty.
Prior to the flood there was no God given authority for human government. God had not given any man the right to punish another for evil, nor the right to make any laws.
After the flood, when God made his covenant with Noah, he specifically granted the authority to punish the wicked and essentially then to create laws.
If you go back to the very ancient world you will find that all of the earliest "law codes" were lists of punishments. They were literally compiled lists of "For this action, this is the just punishment."
This type of law began with God's covenant with Noah when he told Noah, if a person does this, then they shall be punished thus.. specifically relating to the death penalty he says that if a person murders another person, the murderer shall be put to death.
This, interestingly is one of the things often over looked about the uniqueness of the ten commandments in the ancient world. The ten commandments were essentially the first moral law. They were the first lists of "you shall not do this, you shall do this". Rather than just assigning proper punishments to evil actions, it was the first law that commanded moral action.
The point for this conversation though is that the authority by which man makes laws, comes from God. God himself has given authority to human governments to make laws and to enforce the laws.
The reason for this is to restrain wickedness and protect the righteous. Prior to the flood when there were no authorities, no laws, it was utter chaos, the strong oppressed the weak, the wicked triumphed over the righteous and man became virtually totally evil. So evil in fact that God had to kill almost the entire human race in order to save one man and his family, who were literally the only righteous people left.
I'm not saying you have to support the death penalty. However, the death penalty is based on authority that God explicitly stated in scripture that he gave to human governors.
thanks for the honesty, hope we never have to experience that stuff... 
Linear Mode
