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 ...
The little guy was immediately embraced by the One Who loves children Who said “let the little ones come to Me.”
Those who caused his death?
They will face wrath unless they repent.
My point is not that we should have torture as a form of criminal punishment, but that the eye-for-an-eye principle of scripture is justice. It is exactly what is deserved.
The point Christ was making when referencing this principle of justice is that His followers are not supposed to be in the business of exacting justice at every opportunity for the injustices done to them personally. Instead, He demonstrated the higher way of extending grace and mercy to those who have done wrong. It was not a blanket repeal of this law—no more so than His statement that children of the king should not be obligated to pay taxes justifies tax evasion.
This doctrine was for His kingdom which He told pilate was “not from hence”. If His kingdom was from here, He said His servants would fight. His doctrine was not meant to be imposed by Christians upon the governmental authorities of this earth who must mete out justice to wicked men who will never exist in Christ’s kingdom when He establishes it. Further, the laws of Christ were to be written on our hearts rather than being implemented as part of an earthly legal system.
It is also not the job of Christ’s followers to go around demanding that those who have been on the receiving end of great injustices should just “let it go”. Christ taught more on this subject than just this one passage, as I already pointed out.
Luke 18 :1-6
Then He spoke a parable to them, that men always ought to pray and not lose heart, saying: “There was in a certain city a judge who did not fear God nor regard man. Now there was a widow in that city; and she came to him, saying, ‘Get justice for me from my adversary.’ And he would not for a while; but afterward he said within himself, ‘Though I do not fear God nor regard man, yet because this widow troubles me I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.’ Then the Lord said, “Hear what the unjust judge said. And shall God not avenge His own elect who cry out day and night to Him, though He bears long with them? I tell you that He will avenge them speedily.”
Jesus also taught that it would be better to commit a violent suicide than to do what this woman did when she burned this child alive. There MUST be consequences for crime.
If someone robbed a store at gun point and took $1000 and was later caught, brought to trial, convicted, and then the judged sentenced the robber to pay back $1000 as his only “punishment” it would be a travesty of justice. It would send a signal to all would-be criminals that crime DOES PAY. The worst that could happen to you is have to pay back what you stole.
It is similar when a woman can burn a child alive and not get a severe and painful penalty. But we have the ACLU stepping in and saying that certain methods of administering the death penalty are inhumane because the person being put to death might experience some pain. And what’s worse is we have “Christians” taking the ACLU’s (i.e. Satan’s) side on the matter.
If the death penalty is slow and painful, GOOD! It should be. It’s not supposed to be pleasant. Stoning was one such method in the Bible, and it resulted in most of those on the receiving end having fingers ripped off, eyes put out, huge bruises, gashes, and swelling long before they finally succumbed and expired. This is appropriate for those who have earned it.
Perhaps we are at an impasse over where Christians should stand with regards to criminal punishment. I’ll at least take solace in knowing you would be against the former crimes done in the name of the Church and of Christ in which people were tortured for the supposed crime of heresy. I’m assuming we agree on that much.
My point is not that we should have torture as a form of criminal punishment, but that the eye-for-an-eye principle of scripture is justice. It is exactly what is deserved.
The point Christ was making when referencing this principle of justice is that His followers are not supposed to be in the business of exacting justice at every opportunity for the injustices done to them personally. Instead, He demonstrated the higher way of extending grace and mercy to those who have done wrong. It was not a blanket repeal of this law—no more so than His statement that children of the king should not be obligated to pay taxes justifies tax evasion.
This doctrine was for His kingdom which He told pilate was “not from hence”. If His kingdom was from here, He said His servants would fight. His doctrine was not meant to be imposed by Christians upon the governmental authorities of this earth who must mete out justice to wicked men who will never exist in Christ’s kingdom when He establishes it. Further, the laws of Christ were to be written on our hearts rather than being implemented as part of an earthly legal system.
It is also not the job of Christ’s followers to go around demanding that those who have been on the receiving end of great injustices should just “let it go”. Christ taught more on this subject than just this one passage, as I already pointed out.
Luke 18 :1-6
Then He spoke a parable to them, that men always ought to pray and not lose heart, saying: “There was in a certain city a judge who did not fear God nor regard man. Now there was a widow in that city; and she came to him, saying, ‘Get justice for me from my adversary.’ And he would not for a while; but afterward he said within himself, ‘Though I do not fear God nor regard man, yet because this widow troubles me I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.’ Then the Lord said, “Hear what the unjust judge said. And shall God not avenge His own elect who cry out day and night to Him, though He bears long with them? I tell you that He will avenge them speedily.”
Jesus also taught that it would be better to commit a violent suicide than to do what this woman did when she burned this child alive. There MUST be consequences for crime.
If someone robbed a store at gun point and took $1000 and was later caught, brought to trial, convicted, and then the judged sentenced the robber to pay back $1000 as his only “punishment” it would be a travesty of justice. It would send a signal to all would-be criminals that crime DOES PAY. The worst that could happen to you is have to pay back what you stole.
It is similar when a woman can burn a child alive and not get a severe and painful penalty. But we have the ACLU stepping in and saying that certain methods of administering the death penalty are inhumane because the person being put to death might experience some pain. And what’s worse is we have “Christians” taking the ACLU’s (i.e. Satan’s) side on the matter.
If the death penalty is slow and painful, GOOD! It should be. It’s not supposed to be pleasant. Stoning was one such method in the Bible, and it resulted in most of those on the receiving end having fingers ripped off, eyes put out, huge bruises, gashes, and swelling long before they finally succumbed and expired. This is appropriate for those who have earned it.
Perhaps we are at an impasse over where Christians should stand with regards to criminal punishment. I’ll at least take solace in knowing you would be against the former crimes done in the name of the Church and of Christ in which people were tortured for the supposed crime of heresy. I’m assuming we agree on that much.
It is all too common for sinful man to take the Mafia approach: "You insult me, I break your legs. You put one of ours in the hospital, we put one of yours in the morgue. You kill my brother, I kill your whole family."
The Law of Talion was a OT scribal principle not requiring retaliation, but restraining it to strict equal measure.
A familiarity with Matthew 5-7 is necessary here. Especially Jesus' series of Seven Antitheses, each of which follows the pattern, "You heave heard it said... but I say unto you..."
As people remarked at the time, "He (Jesus) speaks with authority, not like the scribes."
“The Law of Talion was a OT scribal principle not requiring retaliation, but restraining it to strict equal measure.”
I agree.
“Jesus’ series of Seven Antitheses, each of which follows the pattern, ‘You heave heard it said... but I say unto you...’”
Yes, and it is often incorrectly assumed He was changing or altering the Law. In context He said He was not destroying but fulfilling the Law. He was correcting the misinterpretation and misapplication of the Law, which He often did.
For example, “Love your neighbor, but hate your enemy” is not a quote from the Law but from the expositors. The actual word for “neighbor” (”rea”) in Hebrew can refer to a friend or enemy. It’s use over and over in the books of Moses includes when a person’s neighbor IS his enemy. The story of the Good Samaritan illustrates that a “neighbor” is really anyone with whom you cross paths. But even in that story Christ does not advocate needless self-sacrifice to the “thieves and robbers”.
So, here is the BIG question: Is this woman who burned a small child alive “neighbor”? If so, how do we love this woman as ourselves?
The answer is found in asking how we would want to be treated if we were in her shoes. This is quite hard to imagine when most of us would never commit such a heinous crime.
But, if we look at the situation from the perspective that there are temporal and eternal consequences of her actions, we can see what is in everyone’s best interest.
It is in the best interest of the family of the child and of society to rid ourselves of such criminals permanently. This requires execution.
However, when considering the perspective of eternity, even the murderer is better off being executed. When a person knows they are going to face justice, they are far more likely to seek God. And it could be that such a person would be spared from Hell. Simply locking her away will NOT accomplish this.
Let me repeat my earlier query though. Do you agree that acts in the past in the name of the Church and of Christ in which people were tortured for being convicted of heresy were wrong and contrary to the teachings of Christ?
But you asked me, not about the application of the death penalty for murder, which I never disputed, but about a different situation: torture for heresy:
Do you agree that acts in the past in the name of the Church and of Christ in which people were tortured for being convicted of heresy were wrong and contrary to the teachings of Christ?
Yes, I do believe that directly intended torture is wrong in every case. I believe it is a violation of the Gospel of Christ and, as well, a violation of Natural Law.
Romans 12:19
Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says the Lord. It is morally deadly to the person who inflicts it, it does not produce true repentance in the person on whom it is inflicted, it corrupts society, and it does not provide any kind of restorative justice to crime victims, in this case, those harmed by the spread of heresy.
As a follow up to those who have followed this story or “non-story”. As far as I can tell there are four media sources who have reported the inhumane death of this innocent child. They are not national MSM.
Two Louisana local news stations
People.com
New York Post
This is outrageous and evidently being covered up because 1) it is a black on white crime, or 2) not important enough or 3) does not involve DJT. I would encourage anyone around the country who is interested, to contact their local news sources and ask why they did not cover this story.
“In cases of heinous crime (such as the burning to death of the little baby referenced in the original article) where guilt is certain and the death penalty would be justified, such punishment should be swift and certain... Yes, I do believe that directly intended torture is wrong in every case.”
In that case I think our differences on the subject are small.
They arrested the mother and charged her with first degree murder.
They arrested the mother and not the black woman?? You got a linky?
I wish they would release more information. So the mother was implicit to the killing and so was the black woman Smith.This just does not make sense. I guess there wan’t two men involved then? This is just too weird.
Wait for it. The police never let anyone know what they know. I’m sure the mother was on their radar screen from the get go but why alert her?
As I posted on your other thread I wonder if insurance policy was involved. Baby insurance is cheap, quick way to pay off drug debt.
I’m sure we will find out. She may spill the beans in hopes that she does not get the death penalty.
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.