• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Would Jesus have supported the death penalty?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
No, Jesus would not!

As for the Old Testament these "laws" are not God's laws per se. They are laws of necessity needed by a struggling new tribe attempting to become a nation. Why do you think the Old Testament also forbids the eating of certain things(pork stands out), can you say Health regulations? God/Jesus has nothing against pork, but to avoid possible Health problems pork was forbidden. Likewise, Nations require complex structure in order to survive, harsh penalties help to provide that structure without placing an overwhelming burden on a fledgeling(sp) society. As traditions become second nature(fully ingrained in citizens daily lives), economic prosperity makes reform possible, and the minds of the people are lifted from day to day survival that a society becomes able to abandon such harsh laws.

It really is no surprise(to me)that Christians were at the forefront of the West's anti-death penalty movement. They were able to see that "giving unto Caesar" when you *are* Caesar requires different laws, if being a follower of Christ is ones true intention. Unfortunetly, too many Christians seem to be followers of Caesar(Caesareans? 🙂 )and fashion Jesus to fit the Caesaerian mold. Instead of instruments of Social Justice, givers of mercy, examples of Love, and Peace Makers, Christianity has become a tool of the government(an opiate similar to TV/movies and other "entertainment" forms)and even in extreme cases, tools of political parties. Like Constantine in Roman times, Christianity has been embraced to gain power. Unfortunetly, as in those same Roman times, Christianity is once again abandoning Jesus and embracing Caesar.

Message to Christians: Feeling good, means nothing! Doing good, means everything!!
 
I think God was trying to make the Hebrews (Israel) a pure a perfect people, so that the surrounding nations would see their prosperity and strength from the Hebrews God as a reason to follw the one true god.

EX 18:5 Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine, 6 you will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.' These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites."

Of course they said sure, we'll follow your laws......

That was the motivation in those laws, keep the nation pure... Of course, it didn't work and men were men. They twisted, subverted and disobeyed 'the law' incessantly.
 
sandorski with all do respect you really way off base.
"As for the Old Testament these "laws" are not God's laws per se"

That statement is so wrong. The first five books of the bible are considered the books of law. Every word that was written by Moses was given by God. Now if you don't believe that. Well I don't know what to say. The law was given by God so that as the Isarelites lived according to the law the heathen or ungodly nations would see their lives and desire to have a relationship with the God of Isarel. Thats why they had certain eating laws as well. Because they were not to do the same things as the ungodly folk. Well it didn't work out that way. Thus the reason for Jesus. This is to the point. In the garden of eden when Adam sinned man became seperated fron God. Man could no longer have a fellowship with God because he was in sin. Thus the reason for the law. The old testament law was to instruct on how to live so that God could still have a part in our lives. Well that didn't work because even with the law man sinned. And with sin came the penalty. So God decided to full fill the penalty of sin through the death of Jesus. As a matter of fact God took pleasure in Jesus' death. Why? So now when a person believes that Jesus died, God rose him from the dead, and now he's in Heaven, Jesus took the penalty of my commiting sin. When a person believes this, they are "born again" christians. In other words Jesus took the fall. So that now we can forever have a fellowship with God because all our sin is forgiven. Now we full fill all of the law, notice I have not said the law has been abolished, but instead we full fill the spirit of the law as we walk in love towards our fellow man and God. But when we break the laws of man and if those laws are just then we have to pay the penalty to our fellow man according to the law. The death penalty can be on of those penaltys. And as we can see that God does believe the death penalty was just punishment for certain crimes. whew....................
 
DT 35:7 Moses was a hundred and twenty years old when he died, yet his eyes were not weak nor his strength gone.

from the last book of the law... did Moses write this?
 


<< Would Jesus have supported the death penalty? >>



Any man that will not enter into Covenant with Jesus, is already dead.

Removing the physical life from the body of a man properly convicted under the Laws of the State, is supported by Jesus, at this very hour.

Gods mercy can and will, supercede the Just Laws of the State ......if ......Words have been planted......if......Words have been tended......if......Words have been harvested.

🙂

 
Classy: The Laws may have been given by God, but they are not universal(meaning unchangeable such as gravity or other physical laws) spiritual laws. The Old Testament laws were primarily to establish the Nation of Israel and to provide to the world a path in which to introduce and herald the coming of the Messiah. Of all the Old Testament laws only the Ten Commandments can be considered as universal, the other laws are for the practical purposes of taking a disorganize group of people and providing a structure in which they could develop into a civilization.

We probably don't really disagree that much, it's quite likely a difference of perception/explanation. I'm sure that if I and you were presented with an adulterous couple, we'd both disregard the Old Testament verdict of stoning them. 🙂
 
I dont think he would have. He did what he did because it was something he considered he had to do at a different level.
 
This is for an essay question, isn't it? I had that same question last year. Th eAnswer is clearly no, because Jesus was a pacifist. He did not believe in any form of violence.
 
Since Jesus is God and God did not have a problem with putting an end to the physical life of a guilty party... Jesus would have been for the death penalty with a heavy leaning toward personal mercy towards others. As for what the Word of God has to say about it, in the NEW Testement we find:

Romans Chapter 13
3 For rulers are not a cause of fear to the good work but to the evil. If you would have no fear of the authority, do good and you will have praise;
4 For he is the servant of God to you for good. But if you do evil, have fear; for the sword is not in his hand for nothing: he is God's servant, making God's punishment come on the evil-doer.

It is pretty clear that the New Testement supports the GOVERNMENT's right to use instruments of death against those who have breached laws that would require such a penalty. Notice that it doesn't put in a mere tool of punishment, i.e. &quot;the paddle is not in his hand for nothing&quot; or &quot;the whip is not in his hand for nothing&quot;, but instead speaks of a deadly device, the sword.

Joe
 
netopia... That was Paul's view then. so Paul was in favor of the death penalty. Show me a passage from the Gospels that supports it and I'll be convinced...
 
~Zonker~

You put more import on one book of the New Testement than another? You put more faith in the first four books than in the rest? Have you considered that Luke never met Jesus but Paul had a personal encounter with Him and spoke to Him AFTER Christ's assention into Heaven? Have you considered that Jesus hand picked Saul of Tarsus to be an Apostle? Did Jesus know what He was doing and what Paul would pen under the influence of the Holy Spirit?

I, for my part, put equal importance on all parts of the Bible, since all Scripture is &quot;breathed&quot; into men by the Holy Spirit. I may endevor to answer your question... but only after you can satisfy me on how the first four books of the New Testement are more the Word of God than the other parts... and, BTW, if the writings of Paul aren't the Word of God, why do you even recognize them as part of the Bible?

Joe
 
Didn't &quot;God&quot; execute the death penalty on Sodom and Gommorah?

My guess is that if a person's existance is of no use to humankind, then God would just as soon deal with the person in His realm than waste any more space down here.
I believe that's how our governments should operate; that if the person has committed such crimes that their presence is more of a debit than asset to society, then eliminate their presence. Society is more important than individual scum, and society shouldn't carry the costs of maintaining such lives in spaces behind bars, because they aren't really living in that state.
 


<< Would Jesus have supported the death penalty? >>



Yes and no.


(Yes) First of all, Jesus is the one who judges (John 5:22). He judges people for life or death (Matthew 25:31-41).

(No) Jesus doesn't support any human government (including their death penalties) - John 18:36. He stated the principle of giving to &quot;Caesar&quot; the things that are &quot;Caesar's&quot; and God's things to God - Mark 12:17. Paul shows that Christians - although &quot;no part of the world&quot; - are subject to the worldly authorities including their death penalty - Titus 3:1; Romans 13:2-4.
 
Netopia;

I consider the writer, the writiers intent and audience and the culture as well as the message of each book of the Bible in forming my theology.

All the books of the Bible shed perspective on Gods nature and are certainly written by men inspired by God to do so. If you study the various authors of the New Testamnet, you can clearly see that Paul and John and James and Jude each emphasized different aspects of Jesus life and ministry. When Martin Luther first compiled his bible he excluded James becuase the contrasting theologies concerning 'justification by faith'.

Paul has a habit, in his letters of insering his own perspective perhaps more than any other NT author, rahter than the message given to him. The most notable verses are the 'ought to's' in 1CO 7

1CO 7:25 Now about virgins: I have no command from the Lord, but I give a judgment...

Paul was, in my opinion, a bit full of himself at times...

1CO 11:1 Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.

And at others he admits his human weakness and falibility...

RO 7:19 For what I do is not the good I want to do; no, the evil I do not want to do--this I keep on doing.

Paul was, without a doubt the greatest evangelist that ever lived. Before his conversion he thought he was excersizing God's will in persecuting and executing Christians. He was literate and fulfilled the calling given to him by Christ with amazing success.

He was a product of his culture. He knew the law intimately. He interpreted the OT in light of Christ's appearance profoundly. He also respected and accepted and was affected by a very hierarchical society of the world he was a part of. The government on top, then men, then women, then children and finally slaves.

All I'm saying is that there is alot of Paul in his letters that I can not believe is applicable to our current situation, (e.g. subordination of women, persecution of gays, slavery) when I have such a hard time finding the same message in the Gospels.

Did I answer your question?


 
~Zonker~

Nice post, very well put.

I guess you and I differ in that I regard all of scripture as being the Word of God. Therefore, be it Paul, Moses or James... to me it's all God speaking. I don't find Paul to be full of bull and NOWHERE do I find him to say that we should persecute homosexuals or any other non-believing sinner of any kind. He does more or less condemn homosexual behavior, but he also comdemn's heterosexual behavior outside of marriage.

Since you don't weigh all Scripture as being the Word of God, I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this one.

Joe
 
Netopia...

I didn't mean to imply that you find persecution of gays in Pauls epsitles. I can point you to a few folks who do, however.
 
In a sense, we are all under the death penalty and all sitting on death row.

Here is some food for thought:

What does Revelation 2:21-23 mean? Jesus is directly speaking in this passage, and he talks about inflicting the death penalty. Of course, he may be speaking metaphorically here.

If one limits oneself directly to the &quot;very words&quot; of Jesus himself, there is precious little biblical material that addresses the topic.

If one is willing to broaden one's understanding of the Word that was (and is forevermore) incarnated as Jesus, it is likely that the pre-incarnate Word is the operative agent in Genesis 18-19, which is the Sodom and Gomorrah episode. Hence, the Word inquired about Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen 18:16-22), &quot;plea bargained&quot; with Abraham (18:23-33), sent two angelic witneeses to observe events firsthand (19:1-12), who found those cities worthy of immediate judgment (19:13-23). Hence, the Word of the LORD did a rare direct intervention (19:24-25), and enforced the death penalty.

Of course, Sodom and Gomorrah were not immediately judged simply for their sexual orientation. They were violent rapists who were immediately judged for their pride, rampant consumerism (&quot;fullness of bread&quot😉, abundance of idleness, and coldhearted apathy towards the poor and the needy (see Ezekiel 16:48-50).

The Bible, Old and New Testament, consistently recognizes the state's right to enforce the death penalty. But I don't know if I could be the one to pull the switch.
 
The debate is between justice and mercy in men's minds. Unfortunately it also includes a taste of revenge (in many cases) and the most critical judgement imagineable has to be involved.


RO 12:19 Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: &quot;It is mine to avenge; I will repay,(DT 32:35)&quot; says the Lord.

Asking me what Jesus would do is almost an unethical question, given His words on the topic, men can find valid arguments for debate on both sides of the issue.

Would Jesus support &quot;a&quot; death penalty, perhaps. I don't think He would support &quot;our&quot; death penalty.
 
Yes, we are to respect the laws of &quot;Caesar&quot;, but I re-iterate, what if &quot;Caesar&quot; happens to be us? Do we simply re-inforce the laws of the previous &quot;Caesar&quot;? Or, do we institute laws based on Christian principles?

If we are to just accept what &quot;Caesar&quot; has instituted, were the Christian men/women who opposed slavery wrong? No, they recognized that slavery was wrong and they used their power and influence to see the end of such a barbaric practice. This despite the fact that even the NT tells slaves to obey their masters, for the anti-slavery proponents recognized that despite slavery mentioned in the Bible, it did not equate to slavery as a justifiable practice. If those great men/women had the same attitude of many modern day Christians, slavery would still be the norm today.

Perhaps we should define just who &quot;Caesar&quot; is. In NT times, Caesar was some guy far away that you would never even see, somewhat akin to our current &quot;they&quot; or &quot;them&quot;. In any Monarchy or Dictatorship, Caesar is always 1 person, most often a man. In a Democracy though Caesar is &quot;us&quot; or at least a large proportion if not a majority of &quot;us&quot;.

If this is true and &quot;we&quot; are Caesar, then we can't offload our responsibility by claiming to abide by the laws of Caesar! If Caesar picks up a stone to execute someone, so do we! I, for one, refuse to stone anyone!
 
sandorski:

I guess we do need to define who &quot;Caeser&quot; is. That is a great first step. Some seem to equate it with secular government which is often abusive or neglectful of God's standards. I'll call this &quot;Definition A&quot;. Others seem to use it as a euphemism for &quot;the State,&quot; which is ultimately established by God. I'll call this &quot;Definition B&quot;.

Under &quot;A&quot;, Christians would by no means accept everything that happens as an evidence of God's deference to state governments. The English Evangelicals who abolished the slave trade are an example of Christians influencing their government to take a moral stand that is in keeping with the spirit of the Bible but goes beyond the literal demands of the Bible.

But, under &quot;B&quot;, you have passages like Genesis 9:5-6, where God himself states that those who take legally innocent human life will have their lives taken. This isn't a godless governmental system but rather is presented as a direct statement from God. Note that the Genesis 9 passage isn't part of the Mosaic Law addressed primarily to national Israel. It seems more univeral in thrust. In fact, it seems to be a deterrent issued by God to prevent mankind from descending into the violence of the pre-Flood society. So, it is hard for me to argue against any use of the death penalty in any and all circumstances.

However, even in the OT, God pardoned individuals who had committed murder. Cain, Moses, and David were all guilty of murder, yet God spared them all. &quot;Mercy triumphs over judgment.&quot; (James 2:13). Given this mindset, I am very concerned by statements that say &quot;justice must be served to give closure to the victims.&quot; Forgiveness, not justice, is what gives the greatest closure. The state may be entrusted with the principle of capital punishment, but it is troubling to see individuals so seemingly eager to carry it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top