This is especially for those who oppose the Death Penalty. Would you still oppose it after reading t

I know that my quote in Post #137 sub bracket 4) said "He" but Sister Pherphane better have a really good excuse (or lawyer) on Judgement Day.

~Steve

 

Im ignoring the ignorance of the posting above yours and your posting is exatly spot on. So many others here have teir own interpretation to what is printed in the Holy Bible. To me, a lot of what is written in the Holy Book is exaact-while many other things are intentionally written as some sort of an Enigma.

 

Stefan, as you should know by now-when i argue a point-it's either because of experiance and or because it's something I read that we all KNOW is factual. Therefore, I KNOW im forcing others to participate in making postings because of the way I post-which is MY goal here.

 

Couldn't have bee saidany better.Also, just for clarification, I don't use the Bible as a way to judge. ;-)

 

.

Yes probably impossible.

My mother told us as children to beware of those who proclaim theselves Christians, "if some-one says they try to be Christian then they are probably Righteous". but then she was regularly chased home from school by Christian kids.

~Steve

 

JI wish you hadnt ignored the posting above Totenkhopfs Carl...I had to go back to page 5 to read it now...And now everyone will want to know and scroll back to page 5 and cause immense overheads on an already heated server across the pond...Therefore causing timeouts, round trip delay and fists banging desks as screen idles itself merrily while we wait to see whos post was above his....It took me ages..Now what where we talking about..

 

Hang on, its now on last page.....this internet thingy is very strange...We cant hang anyone until we get this www stuff sorted.

 

Carl, are you saying that you have some sort of experience of the teachings of Christ that the rest of us have not or indeed that you KNOW the bible to be factual?

That said, I still find it funny that you take a single line from the old testament ignoring so much from the new (as I pointed out, if you were to take that as a principle, following the old testament and ignoring the new you would logically therefore be Jewish) and claim that this is all there is to biblical law. Surely the new testament makes it clear that we are not to judge others, not to harm them, not to kill them for that is the role of god.

 

Stefan--no I don't have any special teachers degree nor that of podium experiance in front of a crowd attending Church. However, neither do YOU have any special qualification in doubting what The Old Testiment says.

So my return question to you is--What's your point your trying to make?

 

Man has convoluted the meaning of Christian that I refuse to call myself one. Instead, I call myself a Follower of Jesus. Afterall, Jesus gave us the option to follow him or not. In my walk, I do stumble but I get up, dust myself off and continue to follow him. But like a drunkard, my steps are swaying from left to right and have difficulty keeping to his steps. To try is all one can ask.

 

Well, I've read the bits of the new testament that contradict it for a start Carl. My point is very simple, you are cherry picking rules from the old testament and ignoring those from the new, by that logic then surely you should also support stoning of women and various other crazy things. I am not doubting what the old testament says (though I would argue that I have every right to), I am simply saying that Jesus himself said that 'You have heard that it was said, “An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.” But I tell you, do not resist an evil person.' So you are choosing to follow a rule from the old testament that your own messiah told you not to follow.

 

Not that I mind at all because it is interesting to see a theological debate, however you are doing exactly that which you accuse Clive, in that you are taking 1 quotation from the New teastement. I think the parable of the "mote and the beam" should be read.

As I previously said as has PzJgr. following in the footsteps of Christ is impossible you can but try and I am sure Clive does, neither he nor you would probably do your respective jobs if this were not the case.

However I still think we are missing the point, what do you do with a person whose behaviour is so appauling?

In the U.K. we had a natural life term prisoner called Myra Hindley, who crime was similar but amplified to that in Clives thread post, Stefan being British knows the story, but for our American friends I will digress, Hindley and her lover Ian Brady jointly killed numerous children and young people -some are still unacounted for. Yet while she was alive she petitioned for parole on life licence proclaiming a miraculous conversion to the Roman Catholic faith- which is quite possible and laudable, but as I previously said a follower of Christ would accept her punishment with serenity, not use her proclaimed faith to wriggle out of her punishment.

So to sum up how should society deal with those who Christ himself condemed as "better they had not been born" in the case of murder I doubt "offering the left cheek" is a realistic option.

Steve

 

Maybe not, but I would have thought that the 'better they had not been born' would be a reference to the punishment they would face at the hands of god rather than man. Surely the Christian argument should be that it isn't the job of society to deal death to these people, by all means punish, but is the power to give and take life not meant to be the prerogative of god alone?

Either way, I'm not a fan of using religion to justify law and justice, partly this is because as a non-believer I don't see why morality should be dictated by any particular cult, partly because if you can justify introducing biblical law (and all the various things that entails) surely then you can justify sharia law too?

By all means use your religion to determine how you live your life but the second you start to inflict it on others you cross a line for me.

 

I could at this point lower the whole tone and put up monty pythons every sperm is sacred but that would just be silly...If its not right to abort on the one hand, it cant possibly be right to deal death at the other.

 

Stefan
Both English-Scottish law, the U.S. legal system and indeed most Western legal systems are based on what is refered to as a Judaic-Christian principles but is now highly devolved and secularised. Not that long ago there was no option to afirm in an English Court of Law- something society so the most part has the Quakers to thank.

by this arguement should society not adopt a pacifist stance with regard to an agressor both interal or exterenal, personally I think not.

I apologise if I wrongly attributed you to the Christian faith -perhaps I should clasify you as a Just person.

~Steve

 

Whilst legal systems throughout the west were indeed based on religious doctrine, they have evolved beyond that, to my mind this isn't a bad thing.

As for the second part, I would say that surely that is part of Christian teaching, turn the other cheek, love they enemy and all that. We pick and choose which rules we are going to follow, in fact Christianity as it has been passed on to us is very much the cherry-picked bits which it was felt would allow an empire to survive and control it's populace. People are all too willing to 'interpret' (which often means 'pervert') teachings to justify things which the text clearly opposes, this is the origin of the notion of 'crusade' and 'jihad,' the interpreting of very vague texts to justify things which are explicitly stated to be wrong.

Back to the same example, you talk about actions with regards aggressors, Christ stated very clearly "I tell you, do not resist an evil person.'' So yes, if you are going to argue for following the teachings of Christ then you should be entirely pacific.

ED: I am sort of a C of E athiest, I was turned off religion by the hypocracy, illogic and nastyness it usually entails. I couldn't say for certain that there isn't a god, but to my way of thinking for an all powerful god to have created the world we live in suggests that he/she/it is a petty, evil being and thus isn't worth worshipping. As a result it has no place in my belief system and so I just try to live my life as a good person and do as little wrong/harm as possible. If it turns out I am wrong then on judgement day I hope that is enough. If it isn't and it turns out that the all powerful ruler of the universe doesn't care whether you live a good life but is only concerned with whether you flatter him with praise and worship during your life, then I guess I'll be vindicated and toddle off to hell. It's where most of my mates are anyhow.

 

Interesting point but beyond the scope of the thread, I find abortion very difficult morally-as I do with State sponsored executions, however in that case it is IMO entirely down to the woman's concience. Biblicaly old teastament law has no ruling on it, nor is it mentioned in the New Teastement to my knowledge, therefore the Christian rightist campaigns are additional to scripture.

Maybe for another thread on another day. The thread is about how we should regard and deal with those crimes have gone beyond the pail.

~Steve

 

Not really Razin, not when some of us are alluding to the sanctity of life.

I dont wish to go off topic with abortion or indeed even start another thread on it, I have no real views on it apart from as you that it is a womans choice of consience.

But when religion is brought into the question of whether the death penalty is justified then I would say that too is beyond the remit of the original question.