I have a problem with it too. And I have no doubt that there is the possiblity of it happening. But that doesnt mean we stop executing people. That means we do everythign possible to make sure that person is guilty. If we cant be 100% sure, then leave them on death row. But, if we had Osama in custody here in the U.S., no one can say he wasnt behind 9/11. No one could say that he didnt kill all of those people. He isnt ever going to prove his innocense. Because he isnt innocent. So, there are people that are guilty, we KNOW they are guilty, and can be put to death.

We have so many appeals, safe guards, DNA testing, etc now to make sure we dont kill someone who is innocent. Sure, innocent peopel go to jail...maybe even death row. But when it comes time to execute them, if there is even a real shred of doubt, we do not execute them. The judges, and governors, all look at the case and look at what the person says is their innocense. And if there is any doubt, then we stop the death sentence and put them in prison for life or until they have proven thier innocense.

As I have said on here..someone show me a person that was put to death since the death penalty was reinstituted in the US in the 70's, that we didnt know beyond a reasonable doubt, that they were guilty. I have yet to see one case!

In His arms.

Mortarman - Check this one out - and there are many more -

Ruben Cantu was 17 in 1984 when he was charged with capital murder in the fatal shooting of a man during an attempted robbery in San Antonio. The victim was shot nine times with a rifle before the gunman unloaded more rounds into the only eyewitness.

The eyewitness, Juan Moreno, told the Chronicle that it wasn't Cantu who shot him. Moreno said he identified Cantu as the killer during his 1985 trial because he felt pressured and was afraid of authorities. (Watch the reporter investigating the case -- 3:16)

Meanwhile, Cantu's co-defendant, David Garza, recently signed a sworn affidavit saying he allowed his friend to be accused, even though Cantu wasn't with him the night of the killing.

Cantu was executed at age 26. He had long professed his innocence.

"Part of me died when he died," said Garza, who was 15 at the time of the murder. "You've got a 17-year-old who went to his grave for something he did not do. Texas murdered an innocent person."

Miriam Ward, forewoman of the jury that convicted Cantu, said the panel's decision was the best they could do based on the information presented during the trial.

"With a little extra work, a little extra effort, maybe we'd have gotten the right information," Ward said. "The bottom line is, an innocent person was put to death for it. We all have our finger in that."

I'm sure that there are other examples as Believer has pointed out...

Meanwhile, I didn't have my Bibles at work...

I agree with you about going to the source..

I will study and pray on this and get back with you later, MM

I AM NOT ANGRY ABOUT THIS!!

I am DUKKING THIS OUT..Hope Pep is listening...

We are having a difference of opinion is all...

I have been ambivalent about whether I want to continue talking about it..I'm not sure it's worth the time or effort for me right now...

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />

Penaltykill saved me from having to post it. hehehe <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I was going to refer to four of my books here at home in case anyone doubted it was true. heh

Believer,

Thanks. I will look into this. And if true, as I said...I still support the death penalty. A mistake does not mean that we stop it. It means we do better next time.

But, anyway...let me look into this. Thanks for posting it!!

In His arms.

Let me get this straight, I've been reading this thread and have been reluctant to post, but it seems that the "logic," the "thinking" of those opposed to the death penalty goes something like this:

Innocent people CAN, and HAVE, been executed for crimes that they were convicted of, in a fair trial, and later on (usually years later), additional evidence is discovered (testimony, DNA, etc.) that would have exonerated the person. However, the sentence of the court has been carried out, and that person (not guilty of THAT particular crime) is dead and cannot be "set free."

Based on that fact, that innocent people have been, or could have been, or might be, executed for crimes that they really didn't do (or simply because the killing of an inmate no matter what he/she did to warrant the death penalty is "barbaric"), ALL capital punishment should be banned so as to "err on the side of the potentially innocent" just in case some evidence might be found in the future that would prove them innocent. So rather than have it be "too late" (he/she WAS executed before the exculpatory evidence was found), ALL executions of ALL prisoners should be halted as the "only humane and morally correct thing to do."

Is that about right for the argument against Capital Punishement?



Ever play or watch "Let's Make A Deal" with Monte Hall?

I'll trade you all Capital Punishment of convicted murderers (commuted to Life Without Parole) for a complete and total ban, cessation, stopping (whatever term you feel comfortable with) of ALL killing of innocent (not even convicted) babies. Let's "err" on the side of morality and "right to life," even if it means giving them up for adoption if you don't want to pay for them for the rest of their lives (like we would HAVE to do with murderers serving life).

IF the issue and argument is MORAL and ETHICAL that no criminal should be put to death no matter how much such punishment might be warranted, then surely a MORAL and ETHICAL case could be made (and should be insisted upon and demanded) for the millions of babies that are killed annually in this country simply because a woman "wants to," for whatever justification she chooses.

And we are not even talking about the accessories to the "crime" who perform, and assist in the performance, of the abortions.

Mimi - as others have cited, the word "kill" encompasses murder in the English language, but the intent of the original writers, and God in the giving of the 10 Commandments, was that part of "kill" that is "kill with intent," i.e., MURDER.

Even in the KJV, which in Exodus states "Thou shalt not kill," it references Matthew 19:18 where Jesus was answering the rich young ruler; "He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, [color:"red"]Thou shalt not murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,[/color] (Matt.19:18 KJV emphasis added)

In the NIV, which I tend to prefer for it's clarity in "today's English," the 6th Commandment reads, "You shall not murder."

It is similar to the choice of the word "whale" instead of "great fish" when referring to the animal that swallowed Jonah. It does NOT change the meaning of what God was saying, but it does show how we have to be careful to convey in our translations the MEANING and MOST appropriate word to convey that meaning, and to translate and choose words that most closely convey the meaning, in order to avoid confusion by readers who don't, or can't, go back to the original language and understand what the various meanings of words were at that time.




No, mimi, it does NOT mean that the Holy Spirit speaks more to MM than to you, or to me, or to any Christian. We all have a "full measure" of the Holy Spirit. But we ARE at differing stages in our walk with God and in our Sanctification Process. We learn, hopefully, as time goes by and we study. It is very natural to have an unclear understanding of many things related to Scripture and to "how to be a Christian." That's why we are admonished to "put on the full armor of God." We learn, we test, we examine, to learn and to correct misunderstandings. That's no different than when God had to "correct" Peter's "understanding" of eating certain foods as he was witnessing for Christ.

The passage about Vengeance that you cited is a case in point, in my opinion, where a biblical truth is being misapplied to something it was not intended for.

What Paul was writing about in that Romans 12 passage was for the INDIVIDUAL, the same as when Christ had admonished us, "be angry, but in your anger do not also sin." The way it is put in the NIV is as follows:

"Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay," says hte Lord. (Rom.12:17-19 NIV emphasis added)

Add to that what immediately follows in Romans 13:

Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. (Rom.13:1-5 NIV emphasis added)

When God COMMANDS us to do, or not do, something, God ALWAYS also provides the MEANS for us to do the command. In this case, God tells us to NOT exact punishment (or in this case...murder) but to leave that up to God. God then establishes Government and gives the authorities the "right" to exact punishment (in this case, capital punishment for capital crimes). The punishment is just and fitting for the crime. Do not forget that "rulers" and "authorities" are also held accountable by God for what they do. If they corrupt their authority, God will exact "vengeance" upon them. Positions of authority should NOT be entered into lightly. And what keeps goverments "doing the right thing with their God-given authority?" Reverence for God and humble obedience to His commands. When men "go their own way," trouble starts and is WHY we are also instructed to OBEY GOD even if the government becomes corrupted by men NOT following God, but following their own desires. Another Commandment that applies to ALL is "Thou shalt have NO other gods before me." That includes selfish desires by those in positions of authority that work out in corruption and harm to the governed.

God bless.

Easy answer?!?!?!? Ok, next question. Given your suggestion, how much r u willing to fork up to cover the experses incurred for 'life imprisonment w/o chance of parole'?

L.

Sounds like a good deal to me. I agree with you. ALL Human life is sacred.

Ok...another easy answer: As much as it costs

Life imprisonment has been shown to be far cheaper than capital punishment when you factor in the legal checks required to try and ensure guilt of the inmate.

Cost aside...when you start talking $, you demean the value of human life...even that of a convicted murderer.

You can't put a $ on human life. It is priceless. It is evil to do so.

Ok...I don't really think we're getting any closer...but I'll close my end of the discusison with this last item...



I pulled it out of context on purpose, as you language is rife with these kinds of statements.

Here is where the logic fails...go a step further.

A sovereign, omnipotent God is capable of anything...even behaving in a manner inconsistent with what we have come to know and expect of Him. Job is a perfect example...in fact, that is a theme of that book. He can do "a new thing" at his choosing.

Now what I think you may be trying to say, and if so, then we agree is this...

If God were to behave in a way that looks like stealing to us...or murder to us...it is not actually either of these, because the very nature those terms is a sinful action...and, by definition, God cannot sin.

The reason I accept that God COULD choose to behave in these ways and I can't is becasue His judgement is PERFECT and mine is not. I could never be sure if I was behaving ina %100 righteous manner. In the case of capital punishment, the cost of not being sure is TOO high for me.

It's been a good discussion.

Low

In our current society, $$ is an intrical part of life. Cost factor comes in many varieties.....cost of birth, maintenance of life and at the end of our lives, even the burial can ring a hefty price tag.

Reality is that the cost of housing someone who commits murder (intentional death) costs plenty. Who bears the burden? Many more innocent victims.

You have been to the jails and seen the overcrowding right? There used t/b a poster here who's spouse worked in the prison system. Ask several in law enforcement and see if the want those who disrespect life such as murders to be taken care of in any environment that would prolong their life.

Need to use common sense. You know prolonging the life of a murder is even cruel to the guilty. Again, who bears the cost? The innocent. No one wins.

L.

Orchid, yep, it all takes money. And here's the deal, "you do the crime, you do the time." No parole, no "time off" for good behavior, etc. Yes, we can have different "levels" of prisons, as in from "country club to maximum security" depending upon WHAT crime was committed and the recidivism rate, but let's talk for now about the "Really BAD" ones like the murderers the thread has been discussing. There's no real thought of "rehabilitation" for these folks, just punishment and removal from "law abiding society."

So the "big" problem we have is not that there isn't enough "room at the inn," it's that no one wants the "inn" in THEIR backyard, sort like the same thing with Garbage Dumps.

So, it would seem that the "obvious answer" is that the USA still has a LOT of "open land" in some places, AND it has the ability to BUY an island somewhere in the middle of shark infested waters (sounds suspiciously like Australia doesn't it? Sorry to all our Aussie friends, no similarity intended to the former British solution).

But how about something like the ANWAR. Caribou notwithstanding, how about just building a bunch of Maximum Security prisons in the "nice, warm, beautiful" surroundings of Alaska? There is MORE than enough room in Alaska for ALL the potential prisons and we can give them their "three squares" for the rest of their lives, or they can duke it out with the other "beasts of the wild" with the shirts on their backs if they want to leave and "check out of the Inn."

That would seem about as reasonable as stacking all the thieves in one "prison" called Congress. Fairness? Guess who sets the "fairness meter" in this country? The inmates ARE, by and large, running the asylum when it comes to "Law, Order, and Punishment." Is it any wonder we have what we have today....the push to save "Tookie types" and the energetic fervor to allow the killing of millions on the mere "whim" or "choice" of a woman....nevermind that the "innocent" seem to have "no voice of support or place of refuge to run to in order to escape the 'cruel and unusual methods of terminating their lives'.

Yet, strangely enough, that same wierd group of "innmates," and especially those sentenced to "life in prison" (Called the Supreme Court), have determined that the same "tissue" that has NO rights and is NOT a "living being entitled to the same protections of the Constitution," IS a PERSON if the mother's life is taken by someone else, thereby causing it's untimely death.

People want to argue about the "clarity" or "unclarity" of God on some issues. WHAT could be MORE CLEAR that if under ANY circumstance the developing fetus IS granted the rights of 'personhood', the summary execution of that baby merely because a pregnant woman WANTS to abort it because it would complicate her life is WRONG and should NOT be legal? In virtually EVERY abortion case that I know of, someone OTHER THAN the mother actually is "hired" to do the killing. Even in a case where the mother might abort the baby herself, we have laws against SUICIDE by the individual and people like Dr. Kevorkian get thrown in jail for "helping and assisting." Thou shalt NOT murder. Period, end of discussion. I disagree with many things, for example, that the Roman Catholic Church holds, but on THIS issue, they are "dead right," if you'll pardon the pun.

So perhaps we should spend a little more energy worrying about all the millions that are being "put to death" every year on the altar of selfish desire and personal choice.

Even in the cases of "legitmate" sin perpetrated against a woman(rape, incest, etc.) one should consider Christ's instruction: "Be angry (righteous anger) but do not also sin (in responsive action)." So let's talk castration of the guilty party and incarceration instead of killing the innocent in response. What do y'all think?

God bless.

Thank You, Forever:

The passages that you quote from Romans speak to my opposition to the death penalty:



This states "bear the sword". Could you define "bear" here? This to me is mainly stressing the need to be RULED and PUNISHED by the authorities. KILLING BY AUTHORITIES IS NOT SPECIFICALLY SANCTIONED...

So what is the purpose of capital punishment anyways? It has not been proven to be a deterrent. Check the figures. It has not done anything to lessen the murder rate in Texas.. which has the highest rate of executions...

I see it as "RETURNING EVIL FOR EVIL...TAKING REVENGE...NOT LEAVING ROOM FOR GOD'S WRATH..." as you have so well-quoted in ROMANS 12...

That's just it..I live according to the NEW COVENANT..not OLD TESTAMENT THEOLOGY..it is likely a religious difference that we probably won't resolve here..

But this is GOOD DISCUSSION...

Forever...you say:



I get concerned about you and MM speaking this way. I know that we have had this sort of conversation in the past. It sounds like you are putting yourselves on a higher level than others. Do you mean this? Are you implying that I am misinterpreting this and you are not because you are on a higher spiritual level? Are you saying that YOU CANNOT BE MISINTERPRETING THIS BUT I CAN? Are you saying that if only I studied and understood this better then I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU?

You went on to even further convince me of my conviction against CAPITAL PUNISHMENT.

You said:



You said, specifically this..



Checkmate: It is ultimately an individual's decision to seek the death penalty..that would be a DA...or individual jurors....

You say:



A stretch..this IS NOT SPECIFICALLY STATED ANYWHERE IN SCRIPTURE..the "right to exact punishment"..yes, I agree with.."THE DEATH PENALTY"...NO....


Are you saying that all those in government have reverence for God's commands? There are those in government with EVIL INTENTIONS...

What about police officers who beat up innocent people.. recently, the man on the street in New Orleans, for example....

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

See, I [God] have set before thee this day life and good, and death and evil.
Deuteronomy 30:15

I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I the Lord do all these things.
Isaiah 45:7

I would be willing to make that deal, FH. No executions AND no abortions. Sounds logical. Problem is, there isnt much logic used in these issues...too many emotions!!

In His arms.

I am not sure how Job applies to this. God did nothing to Job, except remove the hedges of protection around him (although not all of them!!). Satan was the one that tortured Job, not God. god is NOT capable of torture. Torture is antithetical to love.

God said He is love. Thus, since He said He is love, then it is impossible for Him to be unloving, because it would thus make Him unable to be love. He would have destroyed Himself. God said He is just and holy. Thus, there is no way He can be unjust and unholy. It is impossible for Him to do so.

Now, I do agree that sometimes, we do not know exactly what God is doing. We do not know what His will is exactly, and think that God is doing evil. Such as when He ordered the destruction of cities and their inhabitants. How can that not be evil? I mean...everyone of them deserved capital punishment? Women, children? To an outsider, it would appear that God is not love.

But we know God. We know He is not capable of making mistakes or being unloving. He is not capable of murder or evil. We know this about Him, because He told us this.So, when we apply what we KNOW about God to the destruction of these cities, we are then confronted with the question "So, what is He really doing there?"

And when we ask Him, He tells us. I am not going to go into each of those cases, but suffice it to say that since God knew that every one of the inhabitants of that city were never going to follow Him, then they were all guilty. They had deserved death the moment they were born, just as we all did. The difference between them and us was the fact that we ended up following His Son, thus we were spared execution.

As Foreverhers outlined above, God outlined how capital punishment should be done. Thru governments. He said this is proper, and this is how He will get His will done. He was not afraid of man making mistakes. If he had of been, He wouldnt have given the authority to governments.

God says he will act thru those governors and judges. And when they go out of bounds, He will seek vengeance on them (FH had a great warning about entering the public sector...many have NO IDEA what they are getting into because God Himself holds them responsible for the outcome of their rule...which is why the justices of the Supreme Court that went ahead with Roe v Wade will be judged for the millions of deaths they allowed...quite a mess they created for themselves, huh?).

We can know God and we can do His will. When I go overseas to hunt terrorists, I do so at the command of my government. My government is led by a man that bends his knee to Jesus Christ. Thus I can be sure that my mission is of God, and thus the people that I kill are done so with the willingness of God. And when mistakes are made? Of course, that wasnt of God...that was man's mistake. But that doesnt mean that the war or the mission were not of God...it just means that one man in that war made a mistake, and God will judge him for it.

We can know God and we can do His will. He has not banned executions or killing. He HAS banned murder.

In His arms.

Mortarman...

I think we are saying that we can't KNOW GOD..

That is how HE maintains his POWER, AUTHORITY and AWESOMENESS..

We are to TRUST AND TO HAVE FAITH in him...

How can we use OUR LOGIC to understand HIM?

How can you have SO MUCH FAITH in PUBLIC OFFICIALS?

Satan seeks influence over those in POWER....

Come on Mimi! If someone said that they are bearing a sword, what does that mean? What is a sword's purpose? What does it do? It inflicts pain, punishment. It kills! That is its purpose! That is why a sword is made! So, if I bear a sword, that means I am weilding an instrument of death and punishment. Definition of sword: "an agency or instrument of destruction or combat."


Nope. It is punishment. No one really cares if it is a deterrent, although if it was, that would be a bonues! executions are the ultimate in punishment. And as has been shown in Scripture, God has given the power to GOVERNMENTS to exact punishment, which includes this form of punishment. That is why He has authorized, and even commanded at times, executions for many factors in the past. Execution is a punishment, one that God has allowed governments to us in the past and one that He has not rescinded.


But the New Covenant does not negate the Old. God said in malachi that He never changes. Jesus stated that he didnt come to do away with the Law, but to fulfill it. Make no mistake, this world is still under the Law. The issue is if you have accepted Jesus as your Lord and Savior, then you have been freed from the punishment of the laws that you broke. The laws against God.

You see, God never has done away wit hthe Law. That is EXACTLY why Jesus had to die. The Law had to be fulfilled! Justice has to be done.

I am of the New Covenant also. But that does not mean that the Law does not apply to this world anymore. Please dont confuse the fact that the individual has no right to punish. We dont. that is what the passage spoke to. It also spoke to the God given right of governments to punish, which includes execution. God authorized governments to execute in the Old Testament. And there is no where you can find where He ever rescinded that right for governments.

In His arms.