20 Apr 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne1) by eye-witness, i mean several (more than one) persons who saw the murder take place with agreeing stories of what happened. that would clear up the issue of innocence.
1) Does it matter how many witnesses there are, if an innocent man is executed?
2) I don't know that one can be "given" repentance. I see it as the change of heart advocated by Jesus. The overwhelming majority of Christians I know are remarkably unrepentant.
3) I guess I look at murder as killing with intent to do bodily harm to another individual. ...[text shortened]... n between Jesus and one of his disciples, I'm giving Jesus the benefit of the doubt.
2) repentance is granted according to the bible. one cannot just decide to repent. (btw. i'm not a free will kind of xian) i agree that it's advocated by jesus. "repent. and thou shalt be saved!" (in the best jim carey voice doing his best charleton heston voice 🙂 i would have to conclude that the overwhelming majority of xians you know are remarkably not actually believers, but rather cultural in their practice. it is common, esp. in the u.s.
3) mur·der (mûrdr)
n.
1. The unlawful killing of one human by another, especially with premeditated malice.
2. Slang Something that is very uncomfortable, difficult, or hazardous: The rush hour traffic is murder.
3. A flock of crows. See Synonyms at flock1.
(http://www.thefreedictionary.com/murder)
it seems the dictionary agrees that murder requires "malicious aforethought."
4) this is a little hard to argue. i approach the bible as being perfect. i could not convince another person of this, especially if they are not a believer. and i don't see how a person could grow as a believer if they think it is possible to pick and choose what to believe about the bible. based on that world view, i do not believe there are contradictions. there are several things that seem like, i admit. and this may be poor logic, but since i believe that god inspired the whole bible, and that he is smarter than me, then perhaps the problem is with my interpretation rather than the book itself. again, in order to be consistent with myself, i must reply thusly. i am sure you do hold to the same position as me with regards to scripture, therefore, it would be most difficult for us to change the mind of the other on this subsequent issue.
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by twhiteheadThat sounds remarkably like the case (I don't remember the parties involved) in which a mother, suffering from post-partem (sp?) depression drowned her children before they reached the age of "responsibility" for their sins. Are you arguing that someone would actually support her actions? Again, she was suffering from depression, a mental illness, so wouldn't that also describe any sort of position like the one you stated? 😞
So if you kill a Christian then all you are really doing is speeding his path to heaven and if his friends and loved ones are Christian then they will be glad for him and not sad.
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by wittywonkawasn't she from south carolina?
That sounds remarkably like the case (I don't remember the parties involved) in which a mother, suffering from post-partem (sp?) depression drowned her children before they reached the age of "responsibility" for their sins. Are you arguing that someone would actually support her actions? Again, she was suffering from depression, a mental illness, so wouldn't that also describe any sort of position like the one you stated? 😞
me, too...
surely xians don't think xians should be exempt from the death penalty.
is it strictly judeo-christian that the punishment should fit the crime?
what does this mean?
are arabic countries wrong for cutting off the hand of the theif?
are indonesians wrong for killing someone for switching from islam to xianity?
are african tribes wrong for killing other tribes for not being the same religion or language?
are south american tribes wrong for killing other tribes over different parts of the jungle?
should these people be held accountable in some way?
should countries only worry about the justice of their own lands and not interfere with the process of justice in other countries?
does the previous question have a limit to how much one should allow before another country intervenes?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by Big Mac1) You might want to consider that there have been cases of mistaken identity (even with multiple witnesses) and also consider the idea of collusion. If you were innocent and multiple witnesses said otherwise, would you be any less innocent?
1) by eye-witness, i mean several (more than one) persons who saw the murder take place with agreeing stories of what happened. that would clear up the issue of innocence.
2) repentance is granted according to the bible. one cannot just decide to repent. (btw. i'm not a free will kind of xian) i agree that it's advocated by jesus. "repent. and thou shalt ...[text shortened]... would be most difficult for us to change the mind of the other on this subsequent issue.
2) I thought that what was granted was the concept of repentance being accepted to pardon sin. The individual is still required to admit, abhor and abandon his sin, i.e. repent. How else is one's heart changed?
3) Actually I think the term is "malice aforethought" and is consistent with the definition I provided.
4) Even if one believes that all contradictions are the result of the individuals inability to fully grasp the scripture, how does one best follow the ways of God in the interim?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by KellyJaySTOP TRYING TO CLAIM THAT THE OPTIONS ARE EARLY RELEASE OR EXECUTION! WHAT IS WRONG WITH PRISON FOR LIFE?
I think he is correct you it does show a respect for life to punish to
that degree and it isn't ridiculous. As far as wrongly convicted that
has been addresses several times. How many people have died
because we let those guys out of jail that have done those types of
crimes in the past? How many of them would have been spared?
I'm willing to bet those ...[text shortened]... will be small and checks are
all over the place to get it right even after the fact.
Kelly
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOne1) that is a good point. in truth, i don't know how to reply to this "what if" situation. this is part of my question at the beginning. i'm not sure of the validity of capital punishment. i hope you will accept the wavering of a xian. i know it's not a popular position to state, "i don't know," but it is the best i can do with the information provided. "what ifs" are always difficult.
1) You might want to consider that there have been cases of mistaken identity (even with multiple witnesses) and also consider the idea of collusion. If you were innocent and multiple witnesses said otherwise, would you be any less innocent?
2) I thought that what was granted was the concept of repentance being accepted to pardon sin. The individual is ...[text shortened]... bility to fully grasp the scripture, how does one best follow the ways of God in the interim?
2) i agree. the individual is required to do as you stated. however, i don't think the bible provides that the individual can do so of his own volition. the bible seems to point to the fact that one can only do so by the admittance of the holy spirit with a contrite heart. man cannot change his own heart, but must be changed by god. can a patient in need of a heart transplant replace his own heart? now i understand, that a patient must sign a consent form, but it is still the doctor that does the procedure. and with all analogies this will break down when talking about spiritual rebirth.
3) ok. cheers.
4) alas, this can only be done with the salvation provided by god in jesus christ with the assurance of the holy spirit. it cannot be done by man alone. the best way to follow god is to believe in the death and ressurection of jesus.
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by KellyJayNot at all.
I disagree I don't think it shows that at all, and it doesn't even speak
to that issue. What does speak to it are the reasons for that type of
punishment and the lenghts a country goes to getting it right. The
fact that capital punishment is done, only shows where a line is drawn
upon what type of behavior is not acceptable to the nth degree.
Kelly
We don't kill people here in Australia but that doesn't mean that murder is acceptable. It's not about what is acceptable or not to punish someone - it's about whether you are prepared to sanction the state killing any of its citizens.
I'm not.
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by amannionquestion.
Not at all.
We don't kill people here in Australia but that doesn't mean that murder is acceptable. It's not about what is acceptable or not to punish someone - it's about whether you are prepared to sanction the state killing any of its citizens.
I'm not.
what about the terrorists who deliberately target aussies at tourist locations?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneBut not everyone has their hearts changed. On the one hand you would like to see the guilty change their hearts by showing them mercy and giving them more time to sort things out but on the other hand you want the same oppurtunities for change in terms of the hearts of the potential future victims of the murderer in question. So who's life is more important? Also, I would like to see those who have had their hearts changed the oppurtunity to have their lives extended as well so that they can be an influence to those who have had no such experiences.
Yes, ultimately it's about people changing their hearts.
Do you believe that vengeance and murder will remain in the hearts of people once they are changed?
In Biblical times there were no jails. Justice was swift and to the point with no lingering loose ends. In order to prevent the predetory nature of a murderer the murderer was put to death. It was not so much an act of vengence than self preservation. In modern times we have jails, however, how many murderers get life in prison even though that may be their sentence? How many repeat murderers are there after having been released by our judicial system? I do not know the exact numbers but I would venture to say they are high. Our jails are far to crowded to conern itself with jailing every murderer for life just as in Biblical times when they had not jails at all. The sad fact of the matter is that once someone has muredered one time the likelyhood of them murdering again is much higher than someone who has never murdered someone. Therefore, we are faced with providing a safer society to live in by capital punishment or providing society with a less safe environment all in the name of preserving the life of the murderer within society. Which do you favor?
20 Apr 07
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyEvidently I wasn't specific enough. When I asked, "Do you believe that vengeance and murder will remain in the hearts of people once they are changed?", I was speaking of those who support capital punishment.
But not everyone has their hearts changed. On the one hand you would like to see the guilty change their hearts by showing them mercy and giving them more time to sort things out but on the other hand you want the same oppurtunities for change in terms of the hearts of the potential future victims of the murderer in question. So who's life is more important ...[text shortened]... ent all in the name of preserving the life of the murderer within society. Which do you favor?
I favor life imprisonment as any enlightened individual would. Are you so ready to "cast the first stone"?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI'm not so sure enlightenment has anything to do with it. It's funny how people always define their position as the enlightened one.
Evidently I wasn't specific enough. When I asked, "Do you believe that vengeance and murder will remain in the hearts of people once they are changed?", I was speaking of those who support capital punishment.
I favor life imprisonment as any enlightened individual would. Are you so ready to "cast the first stone"?
As far as "casting the first stone," didn't the murderer cast the first stone?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by amannionForgive me if I offended your intelligence. It was not my goal.
Why would you think my response would be any different?
I don't support state sponsored killing.
As with most people, many of us think and even practice something different from what we say when the stakes are personal. If you do not, good. I try not to as well.
To all: Since there are so many nations represented on this sight, I am curious about which countries do have capital punishment. I am from the U.S. We, as a nation, do have capital punishment. (Though many states have since abolished it with in their own borders.)
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by Big MacAnd look at where constantly recasting more and more stones gets us - Iraq, Iran, Israel, Afghanistan, Sudan, Bosnia, Kosovo, Rwanda, and on and on.
I'm not so sure enlightenment has anything to do with it. It's funny how people always define their position as the enlightened one.
As far as "casting the first stone," didn't the murderer cast the first stone?
Yeah, casting all those stones really makes a lot of sense doesn't it?
20 Apr 07
Originally posted by Big MacI know I would think differently if it was my own family that were affected. I'm not completely inhuman.
Forgive me if I offended your intelligence. It was not my goal.
As with most people, many of us think and even practice something different from what we say when the stakes are personal. If you do not, good. I try not to as well.
To all: Since there are so many nations represented on this sight, I am curious about which countries do have capital punish ...[text shortened]... have capital punishment. (Though many states have since abolished it with in their own borders.)
Were my wife or children to be murdered I would be screaming for revenge.
But as I've said before, this should not be the hallmark of a justice system, and is the very reason why families of victims should not have an input into what happens to the perpretators. Let cooler heads prevail would be my thought.