Death Penalty...right or wrong?

[Cleany]

I'm sorry Cleany, but I don't accept your argument that because no-one is infallibly perfect then no-one has the right to uphold the Law, as revealed to Mankind by God through His interaction with Mankind and the record of that interaction that is the written Word of God, the Bible. Your argument is a recipe for subjective moral and social anarchic chaos.

Unless there is an absolute moral standard (the source of which is neither based upon nor a product of Mankind itself) to which all Mankind are able to be objectively held accountable then Humanity has no basis for declaring absolutely anything either right or wrong except on the basis of relative 'majority opinion' (or even worse, the opinion of the minority/individual that have/has been able to take control and impose their will by force).

In such a scenario morality becomes completely relative and countless millions would needlessly suffer and die as a result (as history around the world and throughout time has repeatedly borne witness).

The other thing is that simply because my arguments on this thread are not airtight does not de facto mean that they are false. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of the inerrancy of the Judeo-Christian Scriptures (which I am not in a position to bring to bear here though I have provided links to relevant websites and references to relevant books) and the cultures and civilizations that have been built upon its basis.

Once again, I do not accept that any argument for capital punishment is invalid unless made by God himself. God has declared that capital punishment is to be used, as appropriate, by those in authority to execute those guilty of the unlawful killing of a human being (Gen.9:6; Ex.21:12).

Simonline.

apart from the technicalities i think where we differ in our opinion is that i think i am more a social liberal.

i do not agree with what you have extrapolated from the scriptures, i would agree with those who interpret the same bible differently to you on many points, thought not all of course. our discussion hasnt been about this, but i thought it worth saying.

i do agree, however, that there is a moral standard that has come from god. although we disagree on its source, your dedication to finding it and applying it puts me to shame.

perhaps you are right, perhaps my "argument is a recipe for subjective moral and social anarchic chaos". im sure that you will admit that applying the side of christianity the speaks of social justice in an incredibly complicated thing, with many apparent contradictions.

what i will say is that i think society is already in the beginnings of "subjective moral and social anarchic chaos". i think something that underlines my thinking is that a solution to the problem needs either to be further back than "the law", to the outbreaking of the spirit that started christianity, or perhaps ahead to a new one. i feel that simply applying the law, trying to "go back" in a sense, will not work in the social situation that we have now. technology and prosperity provide far too much freedom to be contained by something as impotent as simply law. it needs power. so, perhaps, i think that talking of the law in such an academic way as i perceive that you do (no offence intended, it is just my view) has a old fashoned powerlessness to it in its presentation. it can easily be perceived as "just more christians telling us what to do".

 

[Simonline]

apart from the technicalities i think where we differ in our opinion is that i think i am more a social liberal.

i do not agree with what you have extrapolated from the scriptures, i would agree with those who interpret the same bible differently to you on many points, thought not all of course. our discussion hasnt been about this, but i thought it worth saying.

i do agree, however, that there is a moral standard that has come from god. although we disagree on its source, your dedication to finding it and applying it puts me to shame.

perhaps you are right, perhaps my "argument is a recipe for subjective moral and social anarchic chaos". im sure that you will admit that applying the side of christianity the speaks of social justice in an incredibly complicated thing, with many apparent contradictions.

what i will say is that i think society is already in the beginnings of "subjective moral and social anarchic chaos". i think something that underlines my thinking is that a solution to the problem needs either to be further back than "the law", to the outbreaking of the spirit that started christianity, or perhaps ahead to a new one. i feel that simply applying the law, trying to "go back" in a sense, will not work in the social situation that we have now. technology and prosperity provide far too much freedom to be contained by something as impotent as simply law. it needs power. so, perhaps, i think that talking of the law in such an academic way as i perceive that you do (no offence intended, it is just my view) has a old fashoned powerlessness to it in its presentation. it can easily be perceived as "just more christians telling us what to do".

I understand from where you are coming but what you seem unable to grasp is that 'the letter of the Law' is for those who are not believers whereas 'the Spirit of the Law' is for those who are believers. The two means of application run concurrently for two separate groups of people, not consecutively, as many people mistakenly believe. An unregenerate person cannot possibly be expected to live in the way that a regenerate believer who is animated by the Holy Spirit can live. The thing that many people miss is that the Messiah's teaching during his 'Sermon on the Mount' (Matt.5-7) was not for everyone but only for believers (i.e. his disciples). The fact that there were also unbelievers present to hear the sermon does not alter this fact. The fact that the Messiah's standards were so high (relatively easy for believers animated by the Spirit but impossible for unbelievers animated by their own sinful nature) is evidenced by the reactions of the audience to the Messiah's teachings.

The absolute source of all morality is the Immutable Nature and Character of God himself. The Bible as the written Word of God is simply the medium through which God has communicated that standard/basis by way of a permanent record for all Mankind. God communicated the information/knowledge personally through his personal interaction in the historical events that are recorded throughout the Scriptures and then inspired and motivated/animated men to write the Scriptures themselves as a permanent record (testimonial) of those events for all Human posterity until the final consumation of the Kingdom.

The Bile as the written record of historical events (as well as a corpus of moral/ethical/theological teachings) is intrinsically linked to the historical events themselves as the written record of those events. If those events did not in fact take place then the written record of those supposed events is utterly worthless and should be rejected in toto.

This is why I trust the Bible as the ligitimate historical record of God's interactions with Man throughout human history. It is on this basis that I am able to study the record in order to learn about what took place before I was born and implement the principles and teachings of the Bible throughout my life as I live it by faith in God and his Messiah who love me and gave themselves for me (Gal.2:20).

If you agree that there is a moral standard that comes from God then what use is that if we are unable to discern and implement that standard because of our own sinful shortcomings? It might as well not exist. Effectively, we are groping around in the moral darkness of relativism until God himself appears on the Day of Judgment to judge us for our sin. However, any such judgment is null and void if those being judged have no prior knowledge of God's moral standards and thus the correlatory concept of sin. The righteousness of God's judgment is predicated upon Him telling Mankind in advance what his standards are, what God expects of Man in upholding those standards, and the consequences of not meeting those standards. Without these a priori warnings, any judgment on God's part is nothing more than a kangeroo court?!

The "recipe for subjective moral and social anarchic chaos" began at the end of the eighteenth/begining of the nineteenth century when 'enlightened' man began to cut himself loose from the moorings of moral absolutes and allow himself to drift away on the sea of relativity without any means of either obtaining or maintaining his bearings in order to find his way home safely. Since then countless millions of lives around the world have been lost having been shipwrecked on the rocks of moral relativism.

Simonline.

 

[Discipleship]

Thanks for asking.

No problem, brother! This is a fascinating topic to discuss.

I think it's both wrong and right... if you get my drift.

 

[soblessed53]

Until just recently,I had always been for it,but the Lord has changed my heart on it. Too many in prison are being proven innocent with DNA tests,so how many innocent are executed? It might be different "IF" we involved God in all levels of the trial process and prayed before jury deliberations,and the jurors were all Christians in good standing with God,but we not that isn't the case,so I just can't stand the thought of anyone,unjustly losing their life,I mean that mistake is forever.

 

[Simonline]

Until just recently,I had always been for it,but the Lord has changed my heart on it. Too many in prison are being proven innocent with DNA tests,so how many innocent are executed? It might be different "IF" we involved God in all levels of the trial process and prayed before jury deliberations,and the jurors were all Christians in good standing with God,but we not that isn't the case,so I just can't stand the thought of anyone,unjustly losing their life,I mean that mistake is forever.

I take your point (though I don't believe it was God who changed your heart) but please do not sacrifice the principle of capital punishment on the altar of bad practise. Just because innocent people are wrongly executed (mistakenly or otherwise) does not mean that the principle of capital punishment for murder is unsound, especially when it was instigated by God who is omniscient and would therefore be fully aware of all those who have been (and are yet to be) wrongly executed for murder. However, that did not stop him from instigating the principle/practise anyway (Gen.9:6). What does that tell you about the value that God places upon all human life and how important capital punishment for murder is to him?!

Simonline.

 

[soblessed53]

Well actaully what changed my mind was thinking how Jesus just flat-out did not operate that way in the NT. Funny how it is always said "God is the same yesterday,today and forever" but when it comes to such a thing as this,Jesus was in no way like the God of the OT,not in one single example!

 

[Simonline]

Well actaully what changed my mind was thinking how Jesus just flat-out did not operate that way in the NT. Funny how it is always said "God is the same yesterday,today and forever" but when it comes to such a thing as this,Jesus was in no way like the God of the OT,not in one single example!

With respect, this reveals that you have absolutely no concept of context.

Firstly, the Messiah is the human incarnation of YHWH the Eternal God of both the Old and New Testaments (in fact the whole of universal history, which is precisely why the Messiah is the same, yesterday, today and forever (Heb.13:8), and the Alpha and Omega (Rev.1:8; 21:6; 22:13)). To try and make out that the Messiah is an entirely different being to that of the God of the Old Testament is Marcionite heresy. If the Messiah is so unlike the God of the Bible [i.e. the Old Testament], as you claim, then in what sense is the Messiah 'Immanuel - God with us'?!

As I have argued all along, God (who later incarnated as the Messiah, Jesus of Nazareth) instigated capital punishment, immediately after the flood, as a part of the Noahic Covenant, for the entire human race for an indefinite period (Gen.9:6) which, to date, has still not been changed (even by the advent of the Messiah as evidenced by Rom.13:1-7, which, according to 1Tim.3:16-17, was also inspired ('God-breathed') by the Messiah (as God)) and not simply for a small section of the human race for a limited period of time. Therefore, the death penalty for murder was neither instigated as a part of the Mosaic Covenant, nor revoked by the advent of the Messiah. Contrary to popular opinion, the death penalty for murder is still in force. Nothing that has happened to date has changed that. The death penalty for murder will remain in force for as long as there are unregenerate people around who are likely to commit murder. Only when the kingdom has finally been consumated and all unbelievers have been expurgated out of the kingdom will the death penalty for murder become obsolete.

Simonline.