Free Republic

I find this topic fascinating (although the anti-Pentecostal and Charismatic comments were less than articulate). I find the ambiguity of God's speaking to us expressed in Scripture itself. I have sometimes wondered if a close reading of God's call through Samuel to Saul to become King might reveal this ambiguity. Samuel describes his speech to Saul as "the word of the Lord" (1 Sam. 9:27) which would seem to assert that Samuel views it as free from error. In addition, the narrator informs the reader at the conclusion of the fulfillment of the signs that "all these things were fulfilled" (1 Sam. 10:9). While these signs were fulfilled, there was a portion of Samuel's prophecy that was not completely without error. Samuel prophesies over Saul telling him that after these signs were done, he should do whatever he sees fit to do (1 Sam. 10:7). Yet when Saul does whatever he sees fit to do (1 Sam. 13), he loses his kingship. Samuel's prophecy demonstrates for me God's ability to accomplish His will through human error-filled prophecy. Hearing God's voice is often messy as it was for Samuel.

This is often mirrored in the daily life of a pentecostal person. This helps me even understand the paradox that is Jimmy Swaggart - a sinful man whom God used as an instrument to bring some to salvation. I personally become bitter with such expression of God's grace - I would prefer God not to use such sinful men as Jimmy Swaggart, yet He does. I would prefer Kenneth Haggin's ministry to die a quick and painful death, yet God uses it as a weak vessel through which God saves.

I wonder if another ambiguous expression of God's will is seen in the book of Acts. Paul receives a vision of a man (aner - which is definitely masculine) calling him to Macedonia for help (Acts 16:9), yet when he arrives, Paul evangelizes a crowd of women (Acts 16:13-14). God's plan is accomplished despite the details be slightly off.

Finally, I found it rather odd that Matthew 18:19-20 was first quoted out of context on this thread. When someone added the context, they quoted what followed rather than what preceded. These verses often annoy the begeebees out of me because they are never quoted in reference to church discpline which is their true context. In this passage, Jesus is assuring them that though they may be alienated from fellow believers when they perform church discipline, they can rest assured that God remains with them. God is even alive in the midst of church discipline?!?!?

Where has all the fun gone on this thread? In the glorious past, mad Christians cried "heretic" on every other post. Now only candid discussion remains. Have we entered the period of the Pax Threada?

It's the captivity that's being compared, not the country. Our captivity in sin is akin to the Israalites captivity in Egypt.

I received interesting responses to my request for Scripture. One (drstevej) assumed I was asking for Scriptures concerning Jesus as the Lamb of God. I was actually asking if the comparison between captivity in Egypt with captivity in sin is ever done in Scripture. I am professing general ignorance, but no one seems to be demonstrating that I am ignorant. Perhaps I really am not ignorant! Wouldn't that be wild one!

The parallel being drawn is between the Israelite escape from Egypt into freedom and the Christian escape from sin into freedom. It's not an indictment of present day Egyptian people or the nation.

While I understand your statement, my ultimate question (as a good Protestant - sola scriptura, BABY!) was "Does Scripture make this connection?" I honestly don't recall Scripture doing this, but this could merely reflect my lack of knowledge about Scripture!

I think the case can be made here that "fullfil" here doesn't have to mean the fullfillment of a prophetic event. In the sense of the word it strongly suggests that Christ's live makes complete and fleshes out the passage. Israel was in Egypt, Christ was in Egypt and everyone in sin is in spiritual Egypt.

Now you have your own 20th/21st century pesher that may not necessarily correspond with a 1st century hermeneutic. I've always wondered how Christianity fares in Egypt when Christianity associates the nation with sin!?!?! Does Scripture associate eternally Egypt with sin or have you chosen to do this following centuries of Christian tradition?

I suspect that it was to promote a more Christological reading. That was, in fact, the end result.

I was hoping that perhaps you had more insight than myself. Maybe this is a new area of study, though. A professor at my institution is now doing a commentary on the Septuagint's version of Isaiah that promises to offer new insights.

These messianic readings arise (in my opinion) not with the purpose of creating a more messianic reading but rather with the result of a more messianic reading. For instance, the reading of John the Baptist as the precursor to the Messiah arises from the LXX rather than from a purposeful misreading of the MT. The LXX changes the word order of the MT so that the voice is emanating from the midst of the desert and, thus, John is in the midst of the desert preparing the way of the Lord (Mt. 3:3). My guess is that this use of the LXX was combined with a distintive pesher of the first century that gave rise to such Messianic readings. This does not disprove Christianity, but it demonstrates God's use of fallible humans and their culture in God's self-revelation. If you/we suppose that you/we have risen above the poor hermenetics of early Christians to read the Hebrew Bible as it truly was, then you/we fool ourselves. Everyone has a hermeneutic. As a Christian, I assert that God used their distinctive style of hermeneutics to reveal God's self in Jesus as the Messiah. I guess the question becomes ... "is your hermeneutic better than the hermeneutic of the first century person?

I'm pumped about next semester - I'm taking a classe entitled "the OT in the NT" which will hopefully explore these different first century ways of reading a text as they appear in the NT.

Not wholesale changes, but "tweaks" here and there to promote a more Christological reading.

What brought about these nebulous "tweaks" of which you speak? Were these tweaks made for the purpose of promoting a more Christological reading or did the tweaks result in a more Christological reading? The former is a damning critique of Christianity while the later is the revelation of a hidden God through finite humanity. Can we explore these tweaks with greater precision?

In the interest of continuing the game of anecdotes (a game which I admit that I began), I will share with you why I actually care about this issue. Often I find that we don't care about issues unless they somehow connect to our own personal experience.

My first encounter with the death penalty was in my home congregation. I was taking one of the youth out to lunch after a Sunday school morning service. This youth began to share with me how her uncle was on death row. She told how her mother no longer speaks to her aunt because the aunt accused her mother of not doing enough to hire a decent lawyer to get their brother off death row. This youth's mother had moved out of their home, sold everything they had and lived in a hotel for a while in order to raise money for an appropriate attorney, but this was not enough sacrifice for the family. Keep in mind - this is an African American family in which the mother works at a gas station to make ends meet while raising two children. The mother and the aunt were appauled at the ineptitude of the public defender that was assigned to their brother's case. Is this truly justice when the rich hire top rate attorneys (O.J. Simpson) yet the poor sell everything they have only to be given a third or fourth rate attorney?

This was followed by further damage to the family. The mother of the man on death row who attended my church also experienced mental delusion because of this sentence. The mother blamed herself. As my youth-grouper put it, she went "mad" as a result of the judicial system failing them. Fortunately, this mother was able to see her son removed from death row this last summer before she died in August because the Supreme Court ruled that the mentally ill and those sentenced by a judge are not able to be put on death row. It was actually a weird but tremendous joy at her funeral when the African American minister could celebrate this break through. Now this man who was on death row will spend the rest of his life in prison with no possibility of parole, which provides some sense of sanity to the family.

The second personal experience I have with the death penalty involves a close friend here at my seminary. Her cousin was executed last April (2002) in his late twenties. She is very upfront with the fact that her cousin raped and murdered a young woman. This friend of mine was asked by her cousin to be his chaplain at his death. This meant that she spent her final hours with him. My friend expressed immeasurable mercy when she said that she only hoped that something good could come from his execution. The husband of the woman had said that he wanted revenge and he hoped that her cousin would rot in hell. My friend hoped that perhaps some sense of revenge would be fulfilled through her cousin's death so that this man might find some healing. Only after the death, the newspaper reported that the husband felt no better or less angry. I was wondering why this man felt no sense of relief at the extreme punishment of his wife's killer. Perhaps this is because revenge does not truly offer comfort. It reminds me of Jesus' statements that "you have heard it said an eye for an eye but I tell you ..."

The death penalty affects more than the person executed - it affects an entire community with immeasurable pain. It also brings little relief to the family of the victim. Now that I've shared my own personal experience (which drives my argument more than any rational argument) What personal events in your life evoke such passion for you on this subject? I am often reminded of the last place Gulliver visits in his voyages. In Gulliver's Travels, he visits the island of the only rational horses. This place of supreme rationality, though, was unfulfilling in living an authentic life. I openly admit that I am moving beyond an Enlightenment paradigm with the above refelctions, but I find it to be a much more fulfilling paradigm. So if you would like to join me in this new paradigm - share your personal experience that is driving your passion on this subject.

I appreciated your response incredibly. It seemed incredibly genuine. Somehow declaring political agendas of pacifism or just war fail grow feet and walk among us in our lives. Your candid response probably does more than any of my rhetoric. So thanks!

I love finding ways that people on different sides of issues can agree. So maybe we can come todgether in this way - pro-Death Penalty and Anti-Death Penalty people agree that the judicial system may not be all it needs to be because innocent people are executed. So what judicial reforms should be instituted?

Is there nobody in Hell? Does "mercy" then mean "no ultimate punishment if the judge is merciful"?

Are you the judge? Or are you the witness (Acts 2:4)?

Pro-death penalty is punishing the guilty.

This seems like a characture of my argument. I don't think I am making the argument that we should not punish the guilty. I am arguing that governments are always fallible. Death is final and we can never revive someone once we discover they are innocent. In the interest of the innocent, we should avoid giving the ultimate sentence of death that can never be revoked.

Given our appeals processes and our public subsidy of legal representation for the accused, I think the standard of "reasonable precaution" is met.

What constitutes "reasonable precaution"? After reading the below stories, I do not think our judicial system has institutred "reasonable precaution." Have I now created a simplistic portrayal of your argument? (I probably have, so feel free to help me along/correct me.)

JIMMY WINGO Dixie Inn, LA

CM's investigation yielded videotaped recantations by the two main state witnesses who admitted they were coerced by a deputy sheriff into lying at Jimmy Wingo's trial. A dismissive Louisiana Governor and Board of Pardons rejected this strong evidence. Wingo, an innocent man, was executed by electric chair on June 16, 1987, for a 1983 Dixie Inn, LA, murder.

· Morning Advocate, June 17, 1987: "Wingo's Case First Failure for McCloskey."

ROGER COLEMAN Grundy, VA

CM's four-year investigation of this 1981 Appalachian murder in Grundy, VA, produced scores of affidavits which plainly showed who the real killers were, and completely unraveled the State's weak case against Roger Coleman at trial. Nevertheless, the courts refused to grant a hearing and the Governor declined to intervene. Coleman was executed on May 20, 1992, still proclaiming his innocence even while in the electric chair. A superbly written book by John Tucker entitled May God Have Mercy (1997, W.W. Norton) tells the Coleman story. In the spring of 2001, CM returned to the Virginia Judiciary to petition it to allow post execution DNA analysis to go forward.

· Los Angeles Times: David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer, July 22, 2001: " '92 Execution Haunts Death Penalty Foes."

"Mercy" does not mean "let everyone do whatever they want with no consequences".

Once again you have solved the world's dilemmas in one single post! I am truly humbled!

Restornu - I didn't quite follow your post. Can you explain a little more?

How do we simultaneously both do justice and love mercy with respect to the death penalty? Pro-Death Penalty people have no problem with doing justice. How can they love mercy? It is a strange tension in Scripture that I haven't resolved. I'm sure, though, that one of you two amazingly brilliant men will take this mystery and expound on it so that no mystery remains. I'm sure you can easily explain all of God's mystery to me in one a few lines of your next post. So amaze me!

We can wring our hands, or we can do our best to ensure that errors are caught. No one can honestly state that anyone is executed in this country without going through multiple rings of various jurisdictions and watchdogs.

Have we really done our best? I just meant Michael Austin (one of the men listed on the webpage listed above). I would recommend that you read some of the personal stories at the bottom of the page listed above (which you either did not do because you posted your post so quickly or you are a speed reader). They tell the personal stories of those who were on death row and have been released. Or those who have been imprisoned for around 20 years (as was the case with Michael) and now released. Without a ministry like Centurion ministries , the multiple rings of various jurisdictions and watchdogs that you mentioned would have proven pointless at revealing the truth.

(Prepare yourself for a good ole' fashion pentecostal altar call) Close your eyes right now and remeber what you've done for the last twenty years. Had a family? Watched your children grow up? Build a career for yourself? Imagine all of this taken away wrongfully. Now ponder whether some of these people would have been executed if there had been no ministry to work on their behalf. I cannot imagine being held guilty for wrongful murder of an innocent man at the hands of the state. Does this sound like any other figure of sacred history? Have you really done all you can to improve the judicial system? (Altar call is now finished :) )

With regard to the death penalty, a graduate of my seminary started a ministry and I thought you might be interested. It is called Centurion Ministries and it works to free those who have been wrongly convicted. Here is a list of cases they have worked on.

Maybe I'll just open up a can of worms and run. I was just wondering where people in this forum stand on life issues. After attending the National Right to Life banquet last night, I am wondering a few things. How we can consistently be pro-life, pro-death penalty and pro-war? Are the right wing Christian conservatives somehow inconsistent in their stance on life by being both pro-life for the unborn yet pro-death penalty when there are those who have been wrongly convicted of murder by our judicial system?

I think I must have misunderstood you at some level because we seem to be agreeing. Wow! That is a rare thing on here!

There is no reason Isaiah can't be studied using the same methods one would use to study the Iliad. But we need to understand that the conclusions of any such analysis are speculative, and that they don't change the meaning or significance of the scripture.

Isaiah can definitely be studied with methods used with other literature such as the Iliad! I think those methods, though, must inevitably become integrated with meaning and significance. In other words, out methods will/must affect our theology. To think that we can somehow distill them and guard them from one another so that they don't change the meaning of the text strikes me as a naive task.

I somehow reconcile my faith with these "secular" methods using R.H. Niebuhr's view of Scripture (which kind of scares me as I say it, because he has such a low Christology). Nonetheless, I'll try to take gems wherever I find them. Niebuhr makes a distinction between insider history and outsider history. So the Hbrw Bible is defined an insider history. The events are secondarily verifiable, but these events as mere historical event are meaningless. These historical events are given meaning through the theological grid that Scripture superimpose upon them (i.e. The Syro-Ephraimitic crisis of 732-735 b.c.e. which Isaiah spoke of is an historical event - the theological grid that makes it an insider history involves the South's need to follow YHWH alone rather than resort to treaties with Damascus or Samaria). The meaning given to these events as sacrilized secular history is the crucial factor. The same events are in view in both versions of the history and both are "true" in their own senses. We can use "secular" methods to ascertain the outsider history rather than the insider history (Maybe now I'm just being naive ... ACK!!!).

I've now written a whole post and I'm not sure if I even came toward any understanding....DOUBLE ACK!!!.... It is a good thing that my faith does not rest on my complete cognitive understanding of the status of Scripture.