Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

God and the Death Penalty
Theology Online ^

Posted on 01/19/2005 8:46:24 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan

Jeffrey Dahlmer raped, killed and ate parts of at least thirteen men. As punishment, the government was planning to feed, clothe, educate, medicate, entertain, and legally represent him for the rest of his life. Families of his victims would pay taxes, in part, to keep Dahlmer comfortable, warm in winter and cool in summer. That type of punishment should scare the dickens out of other mass murderers. Interrupting the governments plans for Dahlmer however, an inmate beat the cannibal to death in prison.

Some oppose the death penalty on practical grounds, arguing that it is not a deterrent. However, in the late sixties, when there were an average of 6,000 murders a year, the United States Supreme Court struck down the death penalty as unconstitutional in the way it was administered. Six years later, when it was re-instituted in the early seventies the number of average annual murders had jumped to nearly 16,000 victims per year.

In countries like Saudi Arabia, which enforce a swift and certain death penalty, violent crime is rare. Singapore and Los Angeles have equivalent populations, yet in one year Singapore had 58 murders (most followed by swift execution) while Los Angeles had 1,063. Criminal sub-cultures like the Mafia show that the death penalty is a powerful deterrent even among career criminals, since few will ever double-cross their superiors, fearing the repercussions.

Others oppose the death penalty on moral grounds. The "morality" arguments of atheists are not persuasive because if there is no God, then there is no absolute morality, only arbitrary and subjective opinion. The anti-death-penalty morality arguments of some Christians, on the other hand, are persuasive to many. They base their arguments on statements made by Jesus Christ and therefore many listen attentively.

These "moral" opponents of the death penalty often intimidate good people into shying away from execution. Many Christians claim society should forgive criminals and instruct them to "go and sin no more." Ideas have consequences and the popularity of this idea parallels a huge sustained crime epidemic.

There is a right way to deter criminals and to end the crime epidemic. That deterrence, however, does not lie in telling Dahlmer to "go and eat no more."

"And will you profane Me among My people...
killing people who should not die,
and keeping people alive who should not live...?"
Ezek. 13:19

Death Penalty Opposition

Biblical arguments against execution consist primarily of six arguments:

First, Jesus said:

Second, Jesus forgave the woman "caught in adultery, in the very act." To those arguing that she should be put to death, Jesus said:

Third, Jesus taught believers to forgive:

Fourth, the New Testament teaches Christians not to judge:

Fifth, Paul taught believers to:

Sixth, the Ten Commandments teach "Thou shalt not kill" (Ex. 20:13).

Biblical History of Execution

In the first crime in the Bible, Cain murdered his brother Abel. Cain intuitively believed that everyone would think themselves justified in executing a murderer.

So God forbade capital punishment:

Without the death penalty, lawlessness reigned on earth:

Within ten verses of the account of Noah's departure from the ark, God instituted the death penalty. Interestingly, the first three commands given to man after the flood parallel the very first three commands given to man before the flood.

Before the Flood
After the Flood
1st Command:

"Be fruitful and multiply... have dominion... over every living thing that moves on the earth." Gen. 1:28

1st Command:

"Be fruitful and multiply... And the fear of you... shall be... on all that move on the earth..." Gen. 9:1-2

2nd Command:

"Of every tree... you may freely eat; but... of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat..." Gen. 1:29

2nd Command"

"Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you... But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is its blood." Gen. 9:3-4

3rd Command (Death penalty forbidden):

"Whoever kills Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold." Gen. 4:15

3rd Command: (Death penalty commanded):

"Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed... Gen. 9:6

These were the only three commands given to mankind before the flood, and the only three commands given to mankind after the flood and before Israel's covenant of circumcision.

Thou Shalt Not Kill

The rendering of the sixth commandment in the King James was very unfortunate. "Thou shalt not kill" in recent versions (like the NKJV, NIV, RSV, ASB, NASB, etc.) is accurately translated "You shall not murder" (Ex. 20:13). In Hebrew, as in English, the words for "murder" and "kill" can be used interchangeably, but their different meanings are easily understood from the context.

The Hebrew word for murder (ratsach, which appears in Ex. 20:13) is translated by the King James as murder/murderer 17 times, slayer/slain/slayeth 21 times, kill/killing 6 times, manslayer 2 times, and death once. The Hebrew word for kill (which appears in Ex. 13:15-harag) is translated by the King James as slay/slayer/slain 132 times, as kill 27 times, murder/murderer 3 times, destroyed once, out of hand once, and made/put/surely 3 times.

The Ten Commandments forbid murder, not killing1. The chapter following the giving of the Ten Commandments has a number of commands from God to execute criminals, including:

It is not plausible to suppose that God contradicted Himself just a few sentences after delivering the Ten Commandments to Moses. Clearly God prohibited murder but insisted upon execution of murderers and others. Some Christians, however, are so influenced by the world's philosophy that they are ashamed of the Lord's own words in Exodus 21. Others talk as though God was a bad God in the Old Testament but that now in the New, He is a much nicer God, as though He has gone through a rite of passage.

God forbid murder, and commanded the lawful execution of murderers.

Execution Not Optional

As punishment for murder, the death penalty was applicable to each and every murderer:

The death penalty was not a maximum penalty, nor was it optional. As the Lord said:

Did God change this law in the New Testament? Consider that Jesus supports the death penalty in Matthew and Mark, and so does John in Revelation, and Paul in Acts and Romans, as does the book of Hebrews.

Jesus Supports Capital Punishment

Jesus affirmed the Mosaic Law even to the keeping of the "least of these commandments" (Mat. 5:17-19). He blasted the Pharisees for giving their own ideas precedence over God's commands:

Jesus reaffirmed the capital statutes of God's law. Not only the murderer (Rev. 13:10; 1 Tim. 1:8-9; Rom. 13:4), but even the one who curses a parent must be put to death (Ex. 21:17 and Lev. 20:9) just as God commanded. God's commands to execute the one who strikes or curses a parent are the death penalty statutes that liberal Christians are the most embarrassed over. However, Christ was not at all embarrassed over His Fathers commands. Jesus repeated these commands without caveat or reservation.

Laying aside the commands of God has its consequences. In America, murder has become the number one cause of death among young black males, and suicide is the number three cause of death among all teenagers. There is a death penalty when children disrespect their parents. If Jesus' telling of God's command is ignored, countless children will die terrible deaths at the hands of other children and by their own hands. On the other hand, if God's command were enforced, rather than ridiculed, the shedding of innocent blood would virtually disappear in our land. God's wisdom would save thousands of children. man's wisdom destroys them.

While Jesus was on the cross the Romans inflicted the death penalty on the two criminals2 next to Him. Christ said nothing in their defense, or against their crucifixions. One of those two mocked Christ. In response, the other criminal (whom Jesus would immediately declare righteous, Luke 23:43) said of their punishments, "we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong" (Luke 23:41). What did this forgiven criminal, this newly justified man, say about the death penalty? Bottom line: the criminals were getting their just punishment. The dying criminal knew the truth, as he said, "we indeed" are "justly" punished.

Revelation Supports Capital Punishment

The angels in heaven also recognize the principle of just punishment.

God will equip the two witnesses of Revelation 11 to execute those trying to harm them.

The Apostle John also taught that you reap what you sow:

Paul Supports Capital Punishment

The Apostle Paul did not object to the death penalty. He knew his rights as a Roman citizen and defended them. Yet while on trial, he volunteered the following endorsement of capital punishment to Porcius Festus, Governor in Caesarea:

Vengeance is inherently good. God said, "Vengeance is Mine." Individuals, however, are not to avenge themselves, but are to allow God to avenge in His way:

While Paul instructs people not to seek their own revenge, but to "give place to wrath." Paul then explains that the proper channel for wrath is the "governing authorities." The government is the "place" for wrath and vengeance:

Godly rulers are a terror to evil doers. Note that God's two witnesses in Revelation "tormented those who dwell on the earth" (Rev. 11:10).

God through Paul specifically commands earthly governments to execute criminals with the sword:

A sword is not used for scourging but for killing.

Paul instructs believers to "not avenge" themselves, "but rather give place to wrath." Governments are the place for wrath for they are "God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath." Individuals have one role, governments have another. Individuals do not avenge themselves, the government does. Believers forgive3, governments execute. So, if the governing authorities are to obey God, they must not bear the sword in vain but execute wrath on the criminal, for they are God's minister to avenge and bring terror on him who practices evil. Thus God commanded execution in large part to meet out vengeance against capital criminals.

Hebrews Supports Capital Punishment

The author of the book of Hebrews also supports the death penalty. The certainty of punishment under the Mosaic law proves the certainty of punishment for rejecting Jesus Christ:

Temporal punishment through the law teaches men of the certainty of God's eternal punishment. If the government neglects the death penalty, then the people will scoff at the second death (Rev. 2:11; Rev. 20:6, Rev. 20:12-14; Rev. 21:8).

Further, showing mercy to the wicked does not produce repentance. As Isaiah wrote:

And as the proverb states:

While the Old and New Testaments strongly support the death penalty, some Christians think Jesus repealed capital punishment during an event that John described in his Gospel.

The Woman Caught In Adultery

Does the story of the woman caught in adultery, forgiven and released (John 8:3-11) negate the death penalty?

God Forgave Adulterers Before

Gomer was an adulteress yet God forgave her (Hos. 3:1). Still, He demanded that His people obey His law (Hos. 4:6).

King David committed adultery and murder (2 Sam. 11). Yet God forgave him (Psalm 32:1-5).

It was a conscious decision on God's part to not execute David. As Nathan said to David:

As Nathan said to David:

Still, God's law remained in effect (Ps. 1:2; 19:7; 78:1, 5-8; 89:30-32; 119).

God forgave the New Testament adulterer just as He forgave Old Testament adulterers, in neither instance revoking His law. God has all authority to forgive the criminal and disregard temporal punishment. Contrariwise, Men must obey God and cannot ignore punishment.

The Pharisees Wanted to Trap Christ

The Pharisees wanted to accuse Jesus of rebelling against the Roman Empire:

Rome had revoked the Jews' authority to put a criminal to death (John 18:31). A straight-forward answer to the Pharisees would have brought Jesus into premature conflict with Rome before His "hour had come." Jesus solved this problem stating, "He who is without sin among you, let him throw a stone at her first" (John 8:7). Christ often frustrated the Pharisees giving clever answers that thwarted their wicked intentions (Mat. 22:15-22; 21:21-27; Mark 12:13-17; Luke 20:20-26).

Jesus Did Not Repeal The Law

Without the law, lawlessness cannot exist. Yet as Christ said, "because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will grow cold" (Mat. 24:12). Christ will throw "those who practice lawlessness... into the furnace of fire" (Mat. 13:41-42).

Jesus was born under the Old Testament law:

The Mosaic law was still in effect in the New Testament according to Jesus:

Some argue that all this changed after the resurrection. Yet after His resurrection, Jesus said:

And years later, "James and all the elders" said to Paul:

Paul Used The Law

Paul teaches that the unrepentant world is still under the law, and that the law is designed to show guilt and to bring people to Christ:

All the world is under the law:

Christians who are untutored in the evangelistic role of the law oppose the foundation of the criminal code upon God's law.

Turn the Other Cheek

Pacifists have an unworkable interpretation of this passage. Imagine applying the pacifist view to a woman being raped? Does a father tell his daughter to not resist the rapist? Pacifist father to daughter being raped: "Don't resist the evil man, honey. Remember, Jesus said, 'Love your enemy.' If he wants you for one hour, stay with him two."

Rather, this teaching is similar to Paul's teaching, "Do not avenge yourselves," knowing that the government is to bring wrath and vengeance against the perpetrator. The command to not avail oneself of "an-eye-for-an-eye" is not a strictly New Testament concept. Many falsely presume that this is a New Testament teaching which opposes Old Testament teachings. However, the command to avoid personal vengeance was just as applicable to Old Testament believers as to us. "Do not say, 'I will do to him just as he has done to me; I will render to the man according to his work" (Prov. 24:29). Graciousness from the believer in his personal life is an enduring virtue and not a new concept.

Further, a slap "on your right cheek" would normally be a back-handed slap such as an insult. A punch to the face would usually land on the left cheek, as most men are right-handed Thus Jesus was not talking about a full-fledged violent attack, an attempted murder or a rape.

Jesus was not here repealing the Mosaic law, but was teaching patience, forgiveness, and self control for the individual.

It Is Personal, Not Governmental

The Sermon on the Mount (Mat. 5-7) does not lay down rules for governments but principles for an upright heart.

In this very sermon Jesus made the distinction between individuals and governments:

Jesus did not tell the judge or the officer to turn the other cheek or to void the law. God wants the governing authorities to uphold the law without mercy (Heb. 10:28; Rom. 13:3-4).

The Other Laws Remain

With the following words, did Jesus repeal God's law that He referred to:

If Christ here repealed "An eye for an eye," as some suppose, did He at the same time repeal the other Mosaic laws that He mentioned in the exact same manner? Few would even begin to argue that He did. Jesus used the words "You have heard... But I say unto you..." to show the personal application of the laws on murder and adultery. He said:

The punishment side of God's criminal justice system in the Mosaic law is directed to governments who were commanded to execute the criminals, it was not directed to individuals. Thus, individuals who used these laws to justify their own lack of forgiveness were misapplying the law. Jesus here repealed neither the prohibitions against murder and adultery nor the command to love your neighbor. Rather, He was correcting misinterpretations. Thus, in the same way Christ was not repealing "an eye for an eye" but explaining the right heart attitude of a believer.

An Unusual Formulation

Old Testament quotes are typically introduced with the phrases "It is written," or "That which was spoken by the prophet," or "Moses said." The formulation used in the Sermon on the Mount indicates that Jesus was not directly addressing what was written, but rather, what was said about what was written. "You have heard that it was said."

Jesus was not criticizing God's law, but the misinterpretation of the law. This becomes obvious when it is realized that at one point, He corrects a command that does not even appear in the law:

"Hate your enemy," does not appear in the Mosaic law. Jesus is not adjusting the law! He is correcting the misapplication of the law.

"You have made the Word of God of no effect by the traditions of men." Throughout this sermon Jesus is rebuking men for misinterpreting the law. And what do men do, they completely misinterpret this sermon.

Pacifists Only Go So Far

Many churches claim to literally "turn the other cheek" (Mat. 5:39). After losing a lawsuit, however, not many churches would give double the judgment amount to their opponent (Mat. 5:40). Further, in the context of evil requests from evil people, Jesus said to "Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away (Mat. 5:42). The members of a church which publicly claimed such a policy would end up poorer than church mice, and with less shelter. Wicked people would take everything they own.

No Contradictions Here

If Jesus in Matthew 5:39 revoked part of the law, He would have severely contradicted His own statement made just 20 verses earlier:

Hence Jesus command to turn the other cheek is not a repeal of God's command to governments to apprehend and punish criminals but a command to individuals to love one another.

But Who Can Forgive Whom?

Some argue that we are to forgive murderers. These same people insist that we incarcerate murderers and make thieves pay restitution. They say "forgive," but actually demand punishment. These objectors do not sincerely believe in forgiveness, they only want to decide on the penalty themselves while rejecting the penalty God has commanded.

You can forgive a debt owed to you, but not one owed to your neighbor. If your friend owes you $100 dollars, you can cancel that debt if you like; however, if your friend owes me $100, you have no such authority to cancel that debt. You can forgive a sin against you, but not a sin against your neighbor. Only God has authority to forgive a murderer and even He will not forgive the unrepentant murderer.

A murderer has also assaulted the community, the law and God Himself. You can only forgive the wrong done against you, not that done against God or your community.

When Jesus spoke of forgiveness, He did not confuse this simple truth. He taught clearly that you must forgive those who sinned against you, not those who sinned against your neighbor. For as He taught Israel to pray:

Jesus forgave sins and the scribes reasoned in their hearts, "Who can forgive sins but God alone?" (Mark 2:7). Thus Jesus realized that men would want evidence for His claim to be able to forgive sins:

So parents of a murder victim should forgive to the extent that they have been hurt, which requires a tremendous amount of forgiveness to cover a tremendous amount of hurt. In America, sadly, their sorrow is agitated and increased by a government that mocks their grief through mercy to the murderer. How does a mother's broken heart heal when the wound is reopened each time her daughter's murderer is up for appeal, or sues the jail, or gets a photo in the newspaper.

Do Not Judge?

But does the New Testament teach believers to not judge? Jesus did say: "Judge not, that you be not judged" (Mat. 7:1)? Jesus gave that teaching to hypocrites (Mat. 7:5) however. For He specifically commands His followers to judge:

"Judge not" is the Hypocrites Golden Rule. For "judge not" (Mat. 7:1-5) is simply a hypocrites application of do unto others as you would have them do unto you (Mat. 7:12). "For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged" (Mat. 7:2). Judge others as you would have them do unto you inverted is Judge not if you do not want to be judged. Therefore the hypocrite does not judge. As Jesus said, "Judge not... you hypocrite" (Mat. 7:1, 5 KJV; Ezek. 16:52).

Jesus warned against judging falsely or with hypocrisy. For immediately after saying "judge not," Jesus taught just how to judge correctly:

Christ kept this theme throughout His ministry. "Hypocrites," Jesus said, "why, even of yourselves, do you not judge what is right?" (Luke 12:56-57). Still, His own followers have mostly ignored the Lord's harsh rebuke: "Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye" (Mat. 7:5). "Judge Not" is the Hypocritical Oath and hypocrite haven. He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones. Such Christians, though, should relocate. Move into "the temple of the great God, which is being built with heavy stones" (Ezra 5:8).

Jesus paid a compliment to Simon [not Peter] when He said:

Paul commands Christians to judge:

Paul elsewhere teaches:

Moses and the law of God condemns and judges sinners, as Christ said:

Paul teaches this also:

God has always approved of giving warning to those who commit crimes:

Then Why Is the Death Penalty
Not a Deterrent in America?

God promises that the death penalty is a reliable deterrent:

Yet, the death penalty as executed through American courts is not much of a deterrent. Wise King Solomon 2,900 years ago explained why this is so:

When a murderer is executed, three appeals and 12 years after his crime, society has largely forgotten about him. His death has almost no deterrent effect on crime. Further, a life sentence cannot be executed speedily. The swift death penalty deters crime and aids evangelism. Thus Christians, in obedience to God, should support the death penalty.


"But if he strikes him with an iron implement, so that he dies, he is a murderer (ratsach as in Ex.20:13); the murderer shall surely be put to death." Num.35:16


Criminals, that is, robbers not from the Greek kleptes for a typical thief, but kakourgos (Luke 21:39) and lestes (Mat.27:38; Mark15:27), for a thief who steals openly (Mat.21:13). This is the same word lestes used for the thieves who attacked the man helped by the good Samaritan. These robbers "stripped him of his clothing, wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead" (Luke 10:30), that is, attempted murder.

Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, speaks of many robbers, one of whom was Judas, son of Ezekias, who, in the aftermath of Herod's death, assaulted the palace in Sepphoris in Galilee, stole its weapons, and was purposely vicious with everyone to build a reputation for himself. Robbers, were also murderers. Elsewhere, Josephus speaks of the Judean Procurator Felix, in AD 52 hiring robbers to kill the High Priest. After that accomplishment, the robbers returned again and again to murder others in the city and in the temple itself. Josephus claims that this is likely the reason God rejected Jerusalem and its impure temple and brought the Romans upon the Jews (AD 70).


The prohibition of personal vengeance has precedence in the Old Testament. "`You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge but you shall love your neighbor as yourself (Lev.19:18). No one could successfully argue that the prohibition of vengeance in the Old Testament negated the death penalty then. And no one can successfully argue the same today.

TOPICS: Apologetics; Current Events; General Discusssion; Moral Issues; Theology
KEYWORDS: deathpenalty; god
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last
Matthew 7:1 & Capital Punishment ("Judge not??)

John 8:3-11 & Capital Punishment

Biblical Verses on Capital Punishment

Matthew 5:43-48 & Capital Punishment

Paul 12:14-19 & Capital Punishment

God's Justice and Ours [Antonin Scalia on capital punishment]

1 posted on 01/19/2005 8:46:25 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc; week 71; xzins; connectthedots; wideawake; Sybeck1; loboinok; escapefromboston; ...


2 posted on 01/19/2005 8:50:41 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan (BURN IN HELL, MICHAEL MOORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

"Jesus reaffirmed the capital statutes of God's law. Not only the murderer (Rev. 13:10; 1 Tim. 1:8-9; Rom. 13:4), but even the one who curses a parent must be put to death (Ex. 21:17 and Lev. 20:9) just as God commanded. God's commands to execute the one who strikes or curses a parent are the death penalty statutes that liberal Christians are the most embarrassed over. However, Christ was not at all embarrassed over His Fathers commands. Jesus repeated these commands without caveat or reservation."

Wait, wait, wait!

So you're calling for the death penalty for people who 'strike or curse a parent'?

3 posted on 01/19/2005 9:04:06 AM PST by johnmilken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LiteKeeper

Ping to interesting article re: death penalty

4 posted on 01/19/2005 9:11:42 AM PST by Hegemony Cricket (Ich bin ein Pittsburgher - GO STEELERS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken

I'm advocating the position that capital punishment is in keeping with Christian teaching.

5 posted on 01/19/2005 9:17:33 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan (BURN IN HELL, MICHAEL MOORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: TexasGreg; jb6

Ping for an interesting death penalty article.

6 posted on 01/19/2005 9:19:06 AM PST by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken
So you're calling for the death penalty for people who 'strike or curse a parent'? Seriously?

The Bible was written by God, not Conservative Coulter Fan.

7 posted on 01/19/2005 9:36:56 AM PST by Freakazoid (God is effortless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan; Freakazoid

According to the quotes from the Bible, Jesus advocates the death penalty for those who curse or strike a parent. The opinion seems pretty clear from the extracts provided by C.C Fan.

Are you suggesting that while you support Christ's call for the death penalty, you think he was mistaken and / or mistranslated when he SPECIFIED what offences should be punished this way?

Surely if we are to take Him at his word we cannot pick and choose when clear guidance is offered?

Note: when people begin "well, what the Lord meant to say..." I get real suspicious.

Or did I misread the post twice? [Very possible]

8 posted on 01/19/2005 9:54:42 AM PST by johnmilken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." (Matthew 5:19)

9 posted on 01/19/2005 9:57:51 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan (BURN IN HELL, MICHAEL MOORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

Capital punishment is Biblically correct.

10 posted on 01/19/2005 10:03:29 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

Hey...I'm not arguing that the Bible and God / Jesus doesn't say that. I'm just asking, since you seem to feel we should be following the letter of God's law, if you feel comfortable supporting Christ's call for the death penalty for those who curse / strike their parents.

From your last post I take it that you do.

I guess I admire you Abrahamic [sp?] faith, I just find it a rather extreme position and am not surprised I've never seen it highlighted before.
But, since God said it I guess the faithful have no choice in this and must also support extending capital punishment to other offences.

Are there any online groups supporting death for unfilial children? I'd love to read their FAQ and clear up what I'm sure are misconceptions on my part.

11 posted on 01/19/2005 10:06:05 AM PST by johnmilken (thanks for enlightening me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: nmh

"Capital punishment is Biblically correct."

For unfilial children, like Jesus says?

12 posted on 01/19/2005 10:06:47 AM PST by johnmilken (thanks for enlightening me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken

"Capital punishment is Biblically correct."

You: For unfilial children, like Jesus says?

Me: Jesus never said the above. Do yourself a favor and read the post. I think you'll find the answer to your question.

13 posted on 01/19/2005 10:29:52 AM PST by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan
Although the law of Moses promoted capitol punishment, Jesus quoted that law to those under the law. Later, He died, not to destroy the law, but to set us free from the law of Moses. We are not under the old covenant, or OT law.

The NT argument for capitol punishment is found in Romans 13:4, which says that civil goverment exists to execute wrath on evil doers. Then it mentions the Roman sword.

14 posted on 01/19/2005 12:18:48 PM PST by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken; Conservative Coulter Fan

So you're calling for the death penalty for people who 'strike or curse a parent'?

You are missing the point,IMHO. IF God's commandments had been followed as stated up to today, it would be so normal and natural that you would not even question in the way you do.
We have digressed so far from this commandment with todays obvious result, that to bring us back to the truth is almost an assault on the mind.

15 posted on 01/19/2005 1:20:15 PM PST by loboinok (GUN CONTROL IS HITTING WHAT YOU AIM AT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

Thank you for the ping. Very good article.

16 posted on 01/19/2005 1:21:27 PM PST by loboinok (GUN CONTROL IS HITTING WHAT YOU AIM AT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

Thanks for the post. Especially the references.

Best Regards


17 posted on 01/19/2005 3:18:22 PM PST by Sergio (If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aimhigh
Christ said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."
18 posted on 01/20/2005 7:32:44 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan (BURN IN HELL, MICHAEL MOORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: johnmilken

Should I take from your post that we should “pick and choose” whatever parts we like and adhere to those parts, but when we come across a part that we don’t like that we should ignore it or defy it through justification on the grounds of utilitarian “values?” Or perhaps even on contemporary secular grounds?

19 posted on 01/20/2005 7:37:26 AM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan (BURN IN HELL, MICHAEL MOORE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Conservative Coulter Fan

I take it from your post that you agree with Christ when he says that death is an appropriate punishment for striking or cursing parents. I just want to know if this is a well-publicised part of the Christian faith - if not, why do you think the Church is setting it's face against one God's (apparently) key laws? As a keen student of religion it's a debate I admit to being ignorant of, but would like to learn more.

And I don't pick OR choose. I am not a Christian (although I love the Sermon on the Mount), so the question doesn't apply to me. A God that calls for death for unfilial children doesn't appeal to me.

And, yes, I'm sure I will repent for the above in Hell, just as soon as I paid off my spiritual debt for cursing my father a few times when I was a misguided teen.

20 posted on 01/20/2005 7:55:16 AM PST by johnmilken
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson