And if so..Why? Don't you think Jesus got the worst of that when he was around? And the Bible does say an eye for an eye, but then it also says Leave wrath up to god....and the latter is in the New Testament...so explain.
2006-06-13 15:20:26 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Okay people...eye for an eye means your crime punished with your crime...Killing a rapest is an eye for a leg. Come on.
2006-06-13 15:29:06 · update #1
TURN THE OTHER CHEEK? AN EYE FOR AN EYE? I THINK I,M A REAL CHRISTIAN AND I SAY WE AS HUMANS ARENT WISE ENOUGH TO DECIDE IF A MAN SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH FOR A CRIME.
2006-06-13 15:43:52 · answer #1 · answered by Bruce 2 · 11⤊ 5⤋
By the same token, the thief on the cross next to Jesus said "We are getting what we deserve, but this man has done nothing wrong" (speaking of himself and the unrepentant thief.) Jesus did not correct him in any way. So, here you have the best possible advocate of capital punishment-- a man who actually received the sentence, had it carried out and (in the middle of suffering greater than anything our current age would call 'cruel and unusual') admitted that he was getting what he deserved.
With respect to law enforcement, the New Testament says, "Do you want to be unafraid of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he is God's appointed agent and he does not bear the sword (the power of coporal, even capital, punishment) for nothing." This is found in Romans 13.
Finally, I would like to add something that I have not heard people mention much if at all, when our American founding fathers included a guarantee against cruel and unusual punishments, what did they have in mind...? For minor infractions (today's drunk and disorderly...?) they had the stocks and the whippng post! And they did not consider THOSE cruel and unusual!
No, they wanted to ban such things as branding, cutting off a hand or foot, or burning out an eye. I think that if we were to re-introduce the stocks and the whipping post, they might have a most salutary effect upon our urban areas today.
I think that the sole reason the law-enforcement community does not want to be less soft on crime is that they are subconsiously afraid of the criminals. They know that the bad guys are better-armed than they are, and that they will have no hesitation at all to shoot first.
I think most bad guys in America today would shoot first rather than get three days and nights in the stocks or thirty lashes on the whipping post. They could not endure the humilation beofre their peers. And they would rather kill or be killed than humble themselves and admit that they were wrong.
But (just to cap it off for those who still feel that such corporal punishment would be wrong) being able to accept correction and humble themselves is a mark of maturity. Those who are mature no longer need such things. I think that it is a reflection of reality to admit that such things are necessary, and a denial or refusal to face reality to fail to admit that such things are necessary.
2006-06-13 22:38:55 · answer #2 · answered by cdf-rom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with "an eye for an eye." I also agree that an example needs to be set. If someone sees a harsh punishment for a crime being carried out then they would be less likely to commit that crime, right. I know I would. People get away with to much sh*t these days.
2006-06-13 22:27:51 · answer #3 · answered by missy55072 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i'm not christian, sorry, i'm an atheist.
i'm firmly against the death penalty. i believe in forgiveness, i believe in teaching, i believe in education.
punishments should always have a goal. and that goal should always be more important than the punishment.
as a kid i was beaten with a belt once, by my father. i remember it as the day of yesterday. funny thing is, i can't remember what it was about, what the reason for my punishment was. i only remember that moment of fear and pain. that implies that the punisment was completely useless, because i didn't learn a thing.
the same thing goes for criminals. whatever they did wrong, we, as a society, have the job of teaching them right from wrong. after they learn right from wrong, they could come back in that society, and pay back society with being a better person.
the second reason for being against the death penalty, is the obvious chance of errors in judgements. not one single wrong death convictions of an innocent person is worth a 1000000 of correct convictions.
2006-06-13 22:38:19 · answer #4 · answered by Thinx 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Im a Christian and for the death penalty. Jesus allowed the "good theif" to still pay the human penalty for what he did. Jesus never tried to get him down nor did He speak in opposition to the death penalty.
On a human level I personally do not want my tax dollars to go for paying for mass muderers to spend life in prison. I cant get free health care, free food, free roof, free college, so why should they?
2006-06-13 22:25:42 · answer #5 · answered by impossble_dream 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.Because there are people who has done harm to young innocent children and don't feel a pinch.I'm not promoting hate but some time back i read that a man pull the intestines of a 3 year old girl from her anus and left it dangling as she tried to find her way home....now you tell me.....what should we do?
2006-06-13 22:26:43 · answer #6 · answered by Firefly 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe in the Death Penalty, I'm against Abortion, and Homosexuality. I believe that when it is said on earth as thou will be done in heaven to me it means that while justice will be up held here it will also be up held within heaven as well when judgement day comes. God Bless.
2006-06-13 22:26:27 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am for the death penalty. And I wish they'd sentence child molesters to death as well! They're sick. And there's no cure for that.
Yeah, Jesus did die for our sins. But do you honestly think a Christian would murder someone?
2006-06-13 22:26:05 · answer #8 · answered by fiestyredhead 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the death penalty is not wrath, it is punishment. The good book says "spare the rod, and spoil the child!
2006-06-13 22:23:27 · answer #9 · answered by Chuck H 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the bible tells us to obey the laws of the land. as jurors they are to meet search for the truth and find a verdict. it is up to the judge to carry out the punishment, but it must coincide with the law.we have earthly laws that we are to adhere to .
2006-06-13 22:32:40 · answer #10 · answered by jesuschild379 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You bet ya.
Num 35:16 And if he smite him with an instrument of iron, so that he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:17 And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:18 Or if he smite him with an hand weapon of wood, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.
Num 35:19 The revenger of blood himself shall slay the murderer: when he meeteth him, he shall slay him.
Num 35:20 But if he thrust him of hatred, or hurl at him by laying of wait, that he die;
2006-06-13 22:22:42 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋