Posted on 07/24/2018 2:25:30 PM PDT by TigerClaws
A six-month old baby boy was kidnapped, set on fire and dumped near train tracks in Louisiana last week.
Baby Levi Cole Ellerbe was kidnapped on July 17 after two people came to mother Hanna Barker's trailer door just after 9pm and sprayed her in the face with what she believed was mace.
Instinctively, the Barker ran to get away, a statement from Natchitoches police said, and when she went back home, found her infant son was missing.
Police said the search for baby Levi began immediately, with additional officers from surrounding precincts called in to help.
Unfortunately, less than 90 minutes after Levi went missing, police were alerted to a fire nearby the railroad, where they found a badly burned six-month-old boy.
Levi was rushed to Natchitoches Regional Medical Center in a critical condition but died on Wednesday from his injuries.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I wish I was. I rage against my political opponents, to the point that I would like an American Pinochet. I sin constantly, my contact with God is sporadic and feels like I'm using Him for personal gain. The good deeds I do are mostly borne of codependence. I'm a sick soul.
Evil satanic animal.
Pray for me, though, for realsies and no irony. I make pious noises, but ... when all is said and done, more is said than done.
We're like Peter walking out on the water because we caught sight of the Lord. But if we take our eyes off of Him for one second, one nanosecond, whoosh! Down we go!
But He didn't make you to be fish food. 
I know what you mean. The Enemy of Souls is walking right out in the open, with death, like rings, on all his fingers.
We just confessed our wrongs to ourselves, God, and one other person.
P'haps that's progress. ^_^
“The death penalty, even when justified, should not be torturous. This kind of fantasizing is morally objectionable, and manifests a corrupt mind.”
In the Bible, justice was eye-for-an-eye.
Stoning was also a common form of capital punishment which is certainly “torture” by today’s standards.
There are limits to what is humane when it comes to human justice. But I think we’ve erred greatly on the side of favoring the criminals over the victims in our society.
There are times when it would be better to have no law at all and let people simply mete out justice as they see fit.
In cases like this I’d support giving immunity to a close relative of a murdered and tortured child and let the family member decide what is just.
Pay close attention to what this passage says about someone who burns someone in a crime:
Exodus 21:22-25
If men fight, and hurt a woman with child, so that she gives birth prematurely, yet no harm follows, he shall surely be punished accordingly as the woman’s husband imposes on him; and he shall pay as the judges determine. But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
More similar passages:
Leviticus 24:19-20
If a man causes disfigurement of his neighbor, as he has done, so shall it be done to him— fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he has caused disfigurement of a man, so shall it be done to him.
See what it says about sympathy for criminals:
Deuteronomy 19:21
Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.
I don’t think the mother was married.
May I reference the New Covenant?
In the Old Testament, under the Law, justice was eye for an eye. There’s a distinction between then, and now.
Nope. An eye for an eye.....
Talk to Jesus about it and give it to Him.
He can fix it and will, in love and mercy and compassion.
This is local. She is NOT the mother.
Were she and the mother acquainted? Or is this thought to be random?
“May I reference the New Covenant?”
I don’t know, was the U.S. Constitution based on the New Covenant?
The New Covenant does not apply to those who are not participants in the Covenant.
“In the Old Testament, under the Law, justice was eye for an eye. There’s a distinction between then, and now.”
Do you think the New Covenant means that God was unjust under the Old one?
The Church operates under the New Covenant, but the Kingdom of God is not yet on the earth. And the earth operates under God-ordained government with citizens who are NOT necessarily Christian.
What you are both advocating MIGHT apply to Christians who are being persecuted for their faith. Christ’s sermon on the mount was not for modeling our criminal justice system by. We could as easily cite His parable in which God is pictured as a king who is willing to put people in the dungeon and torture them. We don’t model our government upon these patterns either. Consider, for example, the parable of the widow appealing to a judge for justice. Christ says that God will AVENGE His own elect.
The Church does not (though it has wrongly done so in the past) execute people. God-ordained governments do.
Re-read the passage to which you are referring when it comes to not following the “eye-for-an-eye”. Christ is talking about how His followers treat others.
Matthew 5:17-18, 38-39
Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill. For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled...
You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.
Would have turning the other cheek to mean allowing criminals to burn your babies to death?
Would you do away with the justice system altogether and just forgive such criminals? That is not what Jesus was talking about.
Romans 13:1-4
Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God’s minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil.
The purpose of eye-for-an-eye criminal justice is to deter would-be criminals and cause them to treat others as the would-be criminals wish to be treated.
If the woman who burned this baby to death had known she was going to get the same, it just might have kept her from committing this wicked act in the first place. But by being overly merciful to wicked criminals, our failing judicial system will result in others assuming they will never pay for their crimes. And we will see MORE of the same. This harms EVERYONE. Even the criminals are harmed because the law does not offer sufficient motivation to deter them from their crimes.
You will see brief references to the Philistines, or the Perizzites, or wicked men like Adoni-bezek, doing such things: they are mentioned as evidence of their depravity. In one instance only does David order the hands and feet of murderers to be cut off, after they were executed; in NO instance is this ordered by the penal legislation of Israel, and commentators point out that David's amputations, even after death, were not in observance, but in violation, of the tenets and spirit of Mosaic law.
In Hittite, Mesopotamian, and Ugaritic literature, you will see lots of texts celebrating torture. These chronicles and legislative texts spell out in graphic detail flaying, the maiming of criminals, enemies and captives, cutting off thumps and toes, castration, disemboweling,torment by fire and water, and sickening piecemeal mutilation.
This is just the sort of thing the Canaanites were abhorred for, referencing their particular depravity: the whole agenda of hell on earth, which is torture.
Although war and the death penalty are spelled out in the Torah, the OT royal chronicles and the Prophets, what you won't find is sadistic displays and judicial mutilation.
Finally, Jesus in the NT (Matthew 5-7) completely and explicitly rejects the whole Law of Talion.
As for the U.S. Constitution, it is an admirable document which I respect as an American; but man's law is just only when it is NOT in conflict with Divine Law.
This happened a week ago and not a peep in news about it. If races reversed there would have been riots and Trump supporters blamed
“Finally, Jesus in the NT (Matthew 5-7) completely and explicitly rejects the whole Law of Talion.”
You reference to the sermon on the mount but ignored the small excerpt which I posted and which addresses this issue. It is clear from numerous passages that He explicitly supported capital punishment, and numerous other punishments for criminal acts.
In no way was Jesus telling His followers, His enemies, or any governments of the world to abandon basic principle of punishment for crimes.
There were people who twisted the Old Testament scriptures to justify their own lack of love, their own eagerness to punish those who had wronged them personally, their own selfishness and greed. This what Jesus was addressing.
We see Christ in other passages make it very clear that certain offenses deserve fines, imprisonment, beatings, or even death. But He was showing a higher way personally for citizens of His kingdom. A person can show mercy and forgiveness.
Anyone who can imagine applying “turn the other cheek” to a person who burns a little child to death is ignoring the volume of scripture about the life of Christ. How did Christ respond to even the slightest wrong treatment of children? He was upset over it. He also warned about the last days in which children would be abused, and He described the terrible wrath of God upon such people.
“In Hittite, Mesopotamian, and Ugaritic literature, you will see lots of texts celebrating torture. These chronicles and legislative texts spell out in graphic detail flaying, the maiming of criminals, enemies and captives, cutting off thumps and toes, castration, disemboweling,torment by fire and water, and sickening piecemeal mutilation.”
Yes, and this was NEVER allowed, even under the Law of Moses. Jesus did not put an end to such customs because they never existed in Israel (except when Israel strayed and served false gods).
Here is an example of the limits of beatings under Moses:
Deuteronomy 25:3
Forty blows he may give him and no more, lest he should exceed this and beat him with many blows above these, and your brother be humiliated in your sight.
The eye-for-an-eye principle is not about desiring to torture anyone. It is about justice. A person who intentionally inflicts harm on someone deserves the same thing to be done to them. This is the essence of justice. The Bible, including the New Testament advocates justice and judgment. There is a lot of false doctrine that twists scripture to promote a false peace, a false mercy, a false basis of forgiveness and salvation.
This woman who burned this child alive is going to go to Hell. Hell is a much worse torment than if this woman were to be burned to death. If she knew that she was going to face this consequence of her actions, she would have never committed them in the first place, which is why eye-for-an-eye exists.
Even today if she knew she was going to be executed for her crimes, she would be much more likely to try to make peace with God and possibly avoid Hell.
So refusing to mete out justice ultimately is LESS merciful because it ignores that people need to face their own mortality and ultimate accountability to God.
“Although war and the death penalty are spelled out in the Torah, the OT royal chronicles and the Prophets, what you won’t find is sadistic displays and judicial mutilation.”
God’s punishment for sin is FAR, FAR worse than eye-for-an-eye.
In Revelation 2-3, Jesus makes it clear He will execute judgment and wants ALL of the Churches to KNOW that He will “render to every person according to his deeds.”
The consequences under the laws of our nations for committing crimes of torture and murder are FAR too lenient so as to encourage would-be criminals to continue to do these things without fear of punishment. This is the clearest indication that these laws are unjust. And it is a crying shame that Christians rush to promote a phony concept of “mercy” in the name of Jesus when such false doctrines are highly destructive to individuals and society.
There is certainly a place for mercy, but there is also a time and place for punishing crimes, such as the burning to death of a innocent, defenseless child. This one cries out for JUSTICE.
Again with the evil, dead eyes. She is a good candidate for the death penalty so that no other innocent is ever endangered again. As for that precious child, we can take comfort in that he is safe now in God’s arms.
You are refuting a pacifist argument I did not make. I opposed neither a just application of capital punishment nor the use of deadly force in war to protect innocents and stop an aggressor. Perhaps you can find a Mennonite to debate but God bless them, that wouldn’t be me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.