Does the Death Penalty Violate Christ...
Punisher

Tuckahoe, NY

#22 Nov 10, 2012
Roland_Deschain wrote:
<quoted text>
People offend for a reason. Something causes them to do so. We can address a criminal's actions by punishment each time they offend or we can address the root cause of their offending to stop them doing it again.
<quoted text>
Yes, however, shouldn't the point be to prevent criminals re-offending and to show there are far reaching consequences for criminal actions?
<quoted text>
I agree. So what is to prevent the best approach being changing a persons behaviour in some cases?
While I agree in principle with most of what you say, Im not so sure we have the resources or the Will, to do that much work on criminals. Especially since we barely pay much attention to people as their in their early training stages of criminality. We're still caught up debating nature vs. nurture vs. both - in even the simplest and/or non-offending of behaviors.(like being gay, or a socio-path)

Seems like it'd require a HUGE Govt program to do this sort of work on the already caught and convicted criminals. Money better spent on intervention type programs for those at most risk of leading a criminal life..???

Certainly an interesting subject to say the least. And certainly one we'll never hear/see our elected employees have. One of many social third rails, huh?
Punisher

Tuckahoe, NY

#23 Nov 10, 2012
21st century Socrates wrote:
<quoted text>
Considering Jesus summed up the the commandments and the teaching of The Law and prophets into two commandments, love God and love your neighbor as yourself, it would stand to reason the death penalty this way.
Loving our neighbor includes protecting the innocent and those unable to protect themselves by maintaining a safe and orderly society.
IF there is no other manner to isolate and remove dangerous, violent people from society for the safety of others, then the death penalty is justified.
For the record, I do not support the death penalty.
But the death penalty is not about protecting "society" - its societal revenge. Nothing more or less.

If a criminal is already incarcerated, where does the death penalty come in? They're already removed and in many cases truly isolated from even their fellow inmates...so how do you then justify the DP..?

Justifying and not supporting...? Sounds like lawyer speak.

Since: Sep 12

Clarkston, Wa.

#24 Nov 10, 2012
No, it doesn't it is right and just
Solicitor General

Columbia, CA

#25 Nov 10, 2012
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>But the death penalty is not about protecting "society" - its societal revenge. Nothing more or less.
If a criminal is already incarcerated, where does the death penalty come in? They're already removed and in many cases truly isolated from even their fellow inmates...so how do you then justify the DP..?
Justifying and not supporting...? Sounds like lawyer speak.
Do you always base your life on presuppositions, projection and imagined models?
You sound like some weak puke liberal.

1) Projecting 'your' opinion does not a fact make.
Who the hell do you think you are?

2) The OP's original question does not assume the perp is already incarcerated.

3) The OP's question does not infer a society wealthy enough to build or maintain secure housing for violent criminals.

There's a very diverse and larger world out there beyond the door of your mother's basement.
Try going out and exploring it sometime.
Maybe,....just maybe....you might learn something.

By the way, have you ever tried using your head for more than keeping your ears from colliding?

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#26 Nov 10, 2012
Punisher wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah, this all plays into the whole way the RCC and the Proty Churches have made excuse for War, etc...as well as their own violence against those deemed enemies of the Church, etc.
One of the things that unhinges these excuses is that the State trains men to kill on reflex, they override mans naturally evolved reluctance to do harm which in many peoples POV is wholly inexcusable by these apologies and doctrinal wranglings.
Let men unencumbered by the machinations of the State/Organization decide whether to kill other men or not...dont make robots of them based on the propaganda of the State/Organization that the other man is evil. Punisher, 2012.
The whole Murder vs. Killing is a pretty shallow pool.
"Thou shall not kill" is one of the more direct rules of this God. That men have only mucked up to excuse their behaviors.
the State trains to kill on reflex for sure is right.
I spent a good deal of my life around Army personnel.
Course, then the subject could be opened up as to the fact that freedom comes with a price, etc.

NDanger

“Third Eye”

Since: Nov 10

You can't get there from here.

#27 Nov 10, 2012
Solicitor General wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you always base your life on presuppositions, projection and imagined models?
You sound like some weak puke liberal.
1) Projecting 'your' opinion does not a fact make.
Who the hell do you think you are?
2) The OP's original question does not assume the perp is already incarcerated.
3) The OP's question does not infer a society wealthy enough to build or maintain secure housing for violent criminals.
There's a very diverse and larger world out there beyond the door of your mother's basement.
Try going out and exploring it sometime.
Maybe,....just maybe....you might learn something.
By the way, have you ever tried using your head for more than keeping your ears from colliding?
Belly roll and oh ya, the proberbial HIGH FIVE!!!
danielle

Welwyn Garden City, UK

#28 Nov 17, 2012
The Death Penalty most certainly violates Christ's teachings and, therefore, no true Christian would ever support it!

“Born again atheist”

Since: Jun 12

Melbourne

#29 Nov 17, 2012
danielle wrote:
The Death Penalty most certainly violates Christ's teachings and, therefore, no true Christian would ever support it!
You know that is a lis. Your stone age mythology wanted people stoned to deth for being gay.

Don't try and tll me it's not okay to humanely put to sleep murders, rapists, basically the worst of the worst whose convictions have no doubt.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#30 Nov 17, 2012
Sceptical_Mal wrote:
<quoted text>
You know that is a lis. Your stone age mythology wanted people stoned to deth for being gay.
Don't try and tll me it's not okay to humanely put to sleep murders, rapists, basically the worst of the worst whose convictions have no doubt.
On what basis does an atheist have to say something is morally wrong except your personal opinion?
danielle

Welwyn Garden City, UK

#31 Nov 17, 2012
Sceptical_Mal wrote:
<quoted text>
You know that is a lis. Your stone age mythology wanted people stoned to deth for being gay.
Don't try and tll me it's not okay to humanely put to sleep murders, rapists, basically the worst of the worst whose convictions have no doubt.
The bible is quite unequivocal on this, it says quite clearly that 'thou shalt not kill'

If you believe that you know better then clearly you are not a Christian.

“Born again atheist”

Since: Jun 12

Melbourne

#32 Nov 17, 2012
danielle wrote:
<quoted text>
The bible is quite unequivocal on this, it says quite clearly that 'thou shalt not kill'
If you believe that you know better then clearly you are not a Christian.
Well clearly it would go against some aspects of the bible but we really can't accept works of fiction as a basis for penalties handed down by a judge.
soapmann

Masontown, PA

#33 Nov 17, 2012
youtube.com/watch... ……The Bible is outdated and referred as a bad influence to people,,Christ was abuse
21st century Socrates

Columbia, CA

#34 Nov 17, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
On what basis does an atheist have to say something is morally wrong except your personal opinion?
Good point, man. HIGH FIVE!

Why do those that don't do always think they can critique them that do?

Paper people that can't hold their water should stay quiet on the sidelines of life.

To those atheists that require explanations, Yeah, I mean you!
danielle

Luton, UK

#35 Nov 17, 2012
Sceptical_Mal wrote:
<quoted text>
Well clearly it would go against some aspects of the bible but we really can't accept works of fiction as a basis for penalties handed down by a judge.
That is not the point. The question is whether the death penalty violates Christ's teachings and clearly it does.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#36 Nov 18, 2012
Sceptical_Mal wrote:
<quoted text>
Well clearly it would go against some aspects of the bible but we really can't accept works of fiction as a basis for penalties handed down by a judge.
The Bible is a work of fiction? What scholars claim this?

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#37 Nov 18, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible is a work of fiction? What scholars claim this?
As for the Catholic Church... The Church does not have an "official" position on the literal historicity of these or any other Bible stories. Whether they are are not has no bearing on whether the lesson they impart is true. Catholics are free to understand them as literal or not. The Church only insists that the Bible is inspired and inerrant and that what it teaches is the truth.

Most fundies simply want to argue about a story in the OT being literally true or not while ignoring the message OF that story.
As for the New Testament, the Gospel is something one either understands and then accepts or does not understand and does not accept, for whatever reason(s) there might be.
This is called faith, hon. You can argue till Dooms Day yet religious beliefs on based on faith that what one accepts as truth is truth.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#38 Nov 18, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
The Bible is a work of fiction? What scholars claim this?
Many Jewish scholars freely admit that many of the stories in the OT were not completely true, but were used to give Jews a history.
The Catholic Church also freely admits that many of the OT stories were borrowed and added to with religious teachings/truths.
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#39 Nov 18, 2012
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>Many Jewish scholars freely admit that many of the stories in the OT were not completely true, but were used to give Jews a history.
The Catholic Church also freely admits that many of the OT stories were borrowed and added to with religious teachings/truths.
Do you have the official statements of your church that show these things to be the official position of your church?

I thought your church believed the Bible to be inspired-inerrant. If what you say is true, then it is not.

“God Loves Ilks!”

Since: Feb 08

Location hidden

#40 Nov 18, 2012
Jeff wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you have the official statements of your church that show these things to be the official position of your church?
I thought your church believed the Bible to be inspired-inerrant. If what you say is true, then it is not.
1) Genre of Creation Stories

So - what is the genre of the creation stories? John Paul II in an audience of Sept 29, 1979 said: "The whole archaic form of the narrative manifests its primitive mythical character." Then he explained further in an audience of Nov 7, 1979: "The term myth does not designate a fabulous content, but merely an archaic way of expressing a deeper content. In note 1 he cited at length Paul Ricoeur. The Pope also said on Sept 12, 1979: "... the first account of man's creation is chronologically later than the second. The origin of this layer is much more remote. The more ancient text is defined as 'Yahwist'...." Pope John Paul II in his Audience of November 7, 1979 said putting Adam to sleep could stand for a return to the moment before creation, so that man might reemerge in his double unity as male and female."

We note two things the Pope said: 1) The genre of the creation stories is myth; but he explained it is not just a fable. He meant it was using an ancient story to bring out some things that really happened. 2) He spoke of the second creation account of man as Yahwist, thereby accepting the JEPD Documentary theory.- These conferences were part of a public series of audiences, but were not published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis: His Conferences on Genesis were published as Original Unity of Man and Woman, Catechesis on the Book of Genesis, Boston, St. Paul Editions, 1981). Hence he did not mean to impose their contents on the whole Church.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/librar...
Jeff

San Jose, CA

#41 Nov 18, 2012
Nettiebelle wrote:
<quoted text>1) Genre of Creation Stories
So - what is the genre of the creation stories? John Paul II in an audience of Sept 29, 1979 said: "The whole archaic form of the narrative manifests its primitive mythical character." Then he explained further in an audience of Nov 7, 1979: "The term myth does not designate a fabulous content, but merely an archaic way of expressing a deeper content. In note 1 he cited at length Paul Ricoeur. The Pope also said on Sept 12, 1979: "... the first account of man's creation is chronologically later than the second. The origin of this layer is much more remote. The more ancient text is defined as 'Yahwist'...." Pope John Paul II in his Audience of November 7, 1979 said putting Adam to sleep could stand for a return to the moment before creation, so that man might reemerge in his double unity as male and female."
We note two things the Pope said: 1) The genre of the creation stories is myth; but he explained it is not just a fable. He meant it was using an ancient story to bring out some things that really happened. 2) He spoke of the second creation account of man as Yahwist, thereby accepting the JEPD Documentary theory.- These conferences were part of a public series of audiences, but were not published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis: His Conferences on Genesis were published as Original Unity of Man and Woman, Catechesis on the Book of Genesis, Boston, St. Paul Editions, 1981). Hence he did not mean to impose their contents on the whole Church.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/librar...
Was John Paul II speaking infallibly when he wrote this? Of course not. Was he speaking for the entire rcc? Of course not. He was just expressing his own opinion and not fact.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Christian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Why lie about the truth? Christian mistranslat... 30 min Barmsweb 316
Scientific Proof Of GOD(for dummies) 37 min 15th Dalai Lama 2,401
I'm YOUR FATHER, IMITATE ME! (Jan '16) 1 hr I love Jesus 20
News Religion, higher education and critical thinking (Aug '15) 2 hr Big Al 9,539
Why the Earth Was Created in Six Days 2 hr I love Jesus 53
Cookie's Place (Oct '13) 2 hr I love Jesus 20,487
Paul the first anti-christ, financed by Rome..T... (Mar '10) 4 hr Jesus is 682
More from around the web