[soc.religion.christian] Is There Biblical Justification For Capital Punishment?

crturner@udenva.cair.du.edu (CYNTHIA TURNER ) (02/05/90)

Moral controversies are ever-present in all societies, and, if anything, the
more advanced a society becomes, the more perplexing appear the controversies.
For example, the development of medical science within our own society has 
opened a Pandora's box of issues.  But that's not the kind of ethical question
I want to address here.  Rather, I want to address a moral issue that has been 
with America since its inception as a nation; capital punishment.

The story has been told of a shipwrecked sailor who, after adrift at sea for
several days, finally spots land.  Swimming cautiously to shore, he wonders if
he is about to land on a civilized shore, or if he will encounter savages.  He
sighs with relief whe he spots a gallows, knowing that the land is civilized.

Of course the story is told to create a paradox.  How can a society which is 
perceived as civilized permit capital punishment?  For some people it is 
equally that America, of all countries perhaps the most vociferous proponent of
human rights throughout the world, could still engage itself in what is felt to
be the most barbaric and inhumane of all punishments.  With our 200 years of
progress and intellectual advancement, how is it that we still, as a nation, see
fit to terminate the lives of some criminals (humans, mind you) against their 
will?

This is certainly a perplexing question, one that grows in perplexity if it is
admitted that well over one-half of the adult population not only endorse its
permissibility, but would like to see it carried out with greater frequency and
a significantly shortened appeal process.  This moral controversy has never 
been resolved in the history of this country.  It should be noted too that if
capital punishment were abolished this would not mean that the controversy is 
finally resolved.  The question of its legality is often times quite separate
from that of morality.  Capital punishment is a paradigm case in point.  

One argument found among proponents for the abolishment is the religious
argument based on the supposition that God is opposed to the willful taking 
of another human life.

As human beings, we are possessed of certain inalienable rights.  The right
to life in this is seen in the context as inalienable.

In the Christian context of this argument, we see it expressed in the phrase,
"God hates the sin, but loves the sinner."  This alleges that God disapproves
of the capital offender's acts, but he is still a human being and is to be 
reguarded the rights of other human beings (forget for the moment the counter-
claim that the offender did not entertain this consideration when he 
perpetrated his inhumanity upon his victim).  The idea behind this argument is
that if the religious person is consistent to his principles of spirituality
he must oppose capital punishment.

Is this valid?  Must one take the view that capital punishment is wrong?  It
would seem if this were so that one would expect to find biblical support for 
such a position.

Strangely, the Bible is directly silent on this issue.  That is, if one seeks 
biblical support, they are going to have to interpret a passage as having
something relevant to apply to capital punishment.

If this is the case, might we not be able to do the same thing in advocacy of
capital punishment?  Is it possible to interpret a passage from the Bible
as giving support for it?  Or, if not directly giving support, then at least
showing that, as a Christian, we ought not to oppose it?

I think we can.  We are all familiar with the story of Jesus' crucifixion.  He
was crucified between two criminals.  Matthew 27:38, Mark 15:27, and John 19:18
tell us this much.  What is interesting , however, is Luke 23:39-43, where we   
read of one criminal taunting Jesus, and the other rebuking the tauntor, 
saying, "Have you no fear of God?  You are under the same sentence as he.  For
us it is plain justice; we are paying the price for our misdeeds; but this man
(Jesus) has done nothing wrong."  The criminal asked Jesus to remember him and
Jesus replied, "I tell you this:  Today you shall be with me in paradise."
(New English Bible)      

There are several interesting points in this story.  First, we are presented 
with all possibilities of individuals under a death sentence.  We have the truly
innocent, the unrepentant guilty and the repentant guilty.  All persons ever
executed fall into one of these three categories.

A famous predecessor to Jesus in the innocent category was Socrates.  In the 
Crito, we find Socrates declining the opportunity to escape, citing what we 
may call the tacit consent argument.  Socrates, by virtue of living as a 
citizen of Athens, thereby gave consent to Athens' system of legal justice,
which found him guilty of corrupting the youth and believing in different gods.
Therefore, Socrates was morally bound to accept the decree of those laws.  
viz., his own death.  Jesus appears similarly bound.  At least, if he weren't,
then we could expect the gospels to have recorded him stating the opposite.

Since the gospels do not reveal such a statement, we can conclude that Jesus
had nothing important to say reguarding our obligation to oppose capital 
punishment on the grounds that it sometimes victimizes the innocent.

Let us direct our attention to the guilty.  We find Jesus silent reguarding
the unrepentant guilty.  If capital punishment is morally wrong, why didn't
Jesus speak out on this issue?  He certainly did not hesitate to speak out on
moral issues, as the gospels account many instances where Jesus said something 
important concerning moral obligations.

Why, then, did he not speak from the cross about capital punishment?  Perhaps
because we, as Christians, are not obligated to do so.  In fact, Romans 13:1
calls for us to submit to our legal authorities.

We are in conflict with that if we oppose the issue of capital punishment 
because of some nebulous Christian obligation.  It's just not there.  I'm 
suggesting that Luke 23:39-43 indicates that Jesus did not intend for us to 
carry such a moral obligation.

The repentant criminal in interesting.  We find him admitting his crime _and_
admitting that he deserves the punishment he is receiving.

Remembering Ted Bundy's last interview before his execution, he said he
deserves to be locked up but not to be executed.  Might he have not been truly 
repentant? 

If he was, we should have heard him say, as in Luke, "I am guilty and I am 
paying the price for my misdeeds.  It is plain justice."  But Bundy did not 
say that.  Instead, he says he deserves the worst possible punishment short 
of taking his life.

Now, if this were right, the repentant guilty in Luke was wrong in saying he
deserves the death penalty, and we could have expected Jesus to correct him
of such.  But Jesus did not correct him.  Instead, he promised to be with him.

Intersting.  If we carefully look at the story of Jesus on the cross, we cannot
conclude a Christian obligation to oppose the death penalty.  If we are forced 
to conclude anything, it might be that as Christians we ought not to say it
is wrong.  Jesus had the opportunity to say it was wrong, and he didn't.

What might we conclude reguarding capital punishment?  One this is that we 
ought not to rally from the point Christianity for our answer.  If we do, we
might be sursprised to find ourselves, following Jesus, to rule in favor of
capital punishment.

The issue should be decided on other grounds.  That's the beauty of this 
country.  Let the people decide.  If the majority favor it, let it be and 
don't moralize it is wrong.

I agree that because something is legal doe not make it moral.  Slavery was
once legal, and so very few would today say it was moral.

But that's my point.  So very few today would say that capital punishment is
not morally justifiable;  99 out of 100 will say no.  The other one is
confused.

We have developed morally as a nation in the past 200 years.  Don't let someone
point to the legality of capital punishment and tell you differently.

dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) (02/07/90)

In article <Feb.5.04.06.04.1990.25511@athos.rutgers.edu> crturner@udenva.cair.du.edu (CYNTHIA TURNER ) writes:
>
>Of course the story is told to create a paradox.  How can a society which is 
>perceived as civilized permit capital punishment?  For some people it is 
>equally that America, of all countries perhaps the most vociferous proponent of
>human rights throughout the world, could still engage itself in what is felt to
>be the most barbaric and inhumane of all punishments.  With our 200 years of

The *most* barbaric?  Where have you been?  I can think of a dozen common
historical (and contemporary) punishments, used by official government agents,
that I would rather die than undergo.  For that matter, it is not at all clear
to me that I would prefer to be subjected to 10 or 15 years of close confine-
ment, homosexual assault, psychological abuse, and prison food, rather than 
die once.  Need we even discuss torture (which is of course what the writers
of the Constitution were talking about when they said "cruel and unusual
punishment")?  Would you really rather be tortured at great length than be
killed?  And what about countries that execute the *families* of criminals?
Is that not more barbaric than capital punishment?  I think you need to keep
some perspective here...

>say that.  Instead, he says he deserves the worst possible punishment short 
>of taking his life.
>
Ah, he should be raped?  His fingernail extracted with red-hot pincers?  I
doubt that this is what he means.  Bundy understands, even if many well-meaning
Americans don't, that there are many fates worse than death.

>The issue should be decided on other grounds.  That's the beauty of this 
>country.  Let the people decide.  If the majority favor it, let it be and 
>don't moralize it is wrong.
>
Hmm.  I could get into a long discussion here about the difference between
moral law and human law, but I'd best summarize.  The purpose of laws (in the
legislative sense) is to preserve order, so that everyone may enjoy a better
life than they would if there were no laws.  That's it.  Period.  Whatever you
may think of that, for better or worse, "right" and "wrong" don't enter into
it.  (Please note: I am not denying that right and wrong exist, or are of great
importance.  I'm just saying that the law doesn't care about them *directly*.)
Now, to preserve order, it is necessary that the people be content enough with
their laws that revolution is avoided.  This means having laws which tend to
coincide with native ideas of justice ("For the Gentiles, having not the Law,
are yet a law unto themselves"--this was *praise*, although we have perverted
the phrase "a law unto themselves" in common idiom).  It does *not* mean 
imposing the inter-personal morality of people onto the Law, and it certainly
does not mean that society can avoid making the hard choices.  Oddly enough,
the abortion issue and the capital punishment issue are really the same thing:
both ask, "In a society of limited resources, whom do we kill that the others
may live as humans?"  Anti-abortion forces say "Don't kill fetuses; let the
population of poverty-stricken children increase without bound until they start
starving."  Anti-execution forces say "Don't kill criminals; spend money and
effort to keep them in large brutal hotels for years at a time, rather than
spending that money to end poverty, hunger, or the drug traffic."  I know that
this sounds like a harsh assessment, but I hope you will think about it in a
detached way.  I find abortion and execution as distasteful, abhorrent, and
unGodly as you do.  I also recognize that the alternatives to them may be even
worse.


-- 
        David M. Tate       | "The logarithms of 1,2,...,10 to base 10^(1/40)
  dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu   |  are conveniently close to whole numbers, which 
                            |  when you think about it, is why there are 12
 "A Man for all Seasonings" |  semitones in an octave." -- I. J. Good.  

jwm@stdb.jhuapl.edu (Jim Meritt) (02/07/90)

Genesis 9:6
Whosoever sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed...

Exodus 21:12
He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall surely be put to death.

Exodus 22:18
Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live

Exodus 22:19
Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death.

Exodus 22:20
He that sacreficeth unto any God, save unto the Lord only, he shall be
utterly destroyed.

Exodus 31:14
Ye shall keep the sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you. every one
that defileth it shall surely be put to death...

Exodus 35:2
Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a
holy day, a sabbath of rest to the lord: whosoever doeth work therein
shall be put to death.

Leviticus 20:2
...Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that
sojurn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall
surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones.

Leviticus 21:9
And the daughter of any priest, if she profane herself by playing the
whore, she profaneth her father: she shall be burnt with fire.

Leviticus 24:14
Bring forth him that hadth cursed without the camp; and let all that
heard him lay their hands upon his head, and let all the congregation
stone him.


Deuternomy 13:10
And thou shalt stone him with stones that he die, because he hadth sought
to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God...

Deuternomy 17:5
Thou shalt bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that
wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone
them with stones. till they die.

Deuteronomy 22:20-21
...and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: then they shall
bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of the
city shall stone her with stones that she die...

Deuteronomy  22:22
If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall
both of them die...

Deuteronomy 22:23-24
If a damsel that is a virgin be betrothed unto a husband, and a man find her
in the city, and lie with her; then ye shall bring them both out unto the
gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die...

Deuteronomy 22:25
BUT if a man find a betrothed damsel in the field, and the man force her,
and lie with her: then the man only that lay with her shall die.


I Kings 21:10
...Thou didst blaspheme God and the King.  And then carry him out, and stone
him that he might die.
==============================================================================

Conclusion:  yes.


-- 
Opinions expressed are solely those of the author, and do not necessarily
represent those opinions of this or any other organization.  The facts,
however, simply are and do not "belong" to anyone.
jwm@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu  - or - jwm@aplvax.uucp  - or - meritt%aplvm.BITNET

gray@neon.stanford.edu (Cary G. Gray) (02/07/90)

On capital punishment, crturner@udenva.cair.du.edu (CYNTHIA TURNER ) writes:

>Strangely, the Bible is directly silent on this issue.  That is, if one seeks 
>biblical support, they are going to have to interpret a passage as having
>something relevant to apply to capital punishment.

The Bible is far from silent on the issue, if you bother to flip back to the
Old Testament.  In the Law, capital pusnishment is mandated for assorted
"abominations" (idolatry and other "crimes against God", certain sexual
behaviors), contempt of court, and murder.  The commandment regarding
murder is most emphatic:  a murderer *must* be executed.  (See Num 35.)

Case law, though, is a less clear:  consider the case put by Joab's
accomplice in the matter of Absalom's murder of Adonijah--the case is set
in 2 Sam 14.  Whether David's judgement in the matter is correct is unclear,
but it is one to consider.

We aren't limited to the Law of Moses, though.  The primary passage on
the subject is from the Code of Noah, in Genesis 9.  Before looking there,
note that it is the Code of Noah which forms the basis of the decision
of the Council at Jerusalem on what instruction the Gentile Christians
should receive regarding the Law (Acts 15); the decision concurs with
what the Jews taught as God's covenant for all mankind, made with Noah,
the father of all (surviving) nations.

In Genesis 9:5-6 (RSV), God says to Noah:
  For your lifeblood I will surely require a reckoning; of every beast
  I will require it and of man; of every man's brother I will require 
  the life of man.  Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his
  blood be shed; for God made man in his own image.

This was taken by the rabbis not as merely permitting capital punishment,
but *requiring* it in all murder cases--an idea echoed in the Law's
treatment of the subject (Num 35).  It further obligates the next-of-kin
to seek such justice for the victim.

The Old Testament makes an exceptionally strong case for capital punishment
for murder.  It also makes strong evidentiary requirements: two witnesses
who testify under the penalty of death for perjury.  

This is far from the complete treatise on the subject.  (For example, 
the rabbis later made it essentially impossible to impose a death penalty.)
But any scripturally-based discussion of capital punishment needs to start
in Genesis 9.

	Cary Gray
	gray@cs.stanford.edu

jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) (02/09/90)

If I might, I'd like to pose a question to the author of this article.
What were your feelings about capital punishment before you decided to
research it in the Bible?  

You also may notice that Jesus fails to condemn slavery and abortion as well.
In the situation with the prostitute Jesus says "Let he that is without sin
cast the first stone."  Now, it can be argued that Jesus only said this to
avoid a trap posed by the Pharisee's however, I don't believe Jesus didn't
also use the situation to make a philosopical point.  I don't believe Jesus
to be one to waste words, and see every reason to take this one at face
value.  One ought to be careful when one starts out a sentence..."Jesus didn't
really meant that..."

The problem is no one is equipped to sit in judgement.  Vengeance alone is
reserved for the Lord.  The problem also is the heart of the one who does
the executing, and condemning.  The sin is in the heart of the one who
demands justice, who calls for the execution.  

"I require mercy, not sacrifice"

"He that lives by the sword will die by the sword"

"Whatever you do to the least of me, you do to me"

We all know that Paul before his conversion persecuted Christians.
How do we know, in the case of a condemned killer, that God dosen't perhaps
have plans to reach other inmates, and individuals, through this person.  How
can we say to God, "I have no room for compassion for this individual.  I 
will willingly, as he moans, and protests, end his life.  I can see no reason
for this person to live, and for the sake of his victims, I will kill him."

Compassion for the families of the victims?  
Sate their thirst for vengeance!  
Is this showing them compassion or helping them sin?

I suppose we are filled with compassion for the little boy who was 
sodomized by Richard Rameriez ( aka the Night Stalker ).  Let us speculate
and wonder how we might feel about this boy if, as a result of this 
traumatic experience, he grows up to be a killer.  Will we have compassion
for him then?

*my apologies to those who need scriptural references to my biblical quotes.


-- 
-jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov   
-ames!elroy!jato!jrossi           R * U * 1 * 2 * ? U * 2 * R * 1 !
**********************STANDARD DISCLAIMER******************************  

kriz@skat.usc.edu (Dennis Kriz) (02/09/90)

In article <9827@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@dime.cs.umass.edu (Victor Yodaiken) writes:

Concerning Bernardin's "Seamless Garment" or not ... there's quite a bit
that needs to be done within the Christian tradition for it to live up to
its call of treating everyone in the way Christ had commanded:
"even as you do onto the least of my brothers and sisters, you do onto me"

>Role of women:
>(I Timothy 3 11-15)
>
>Hatred the Christians have heaved upon the Jews:
>(Epistle of Paul to Titus, 10)
>(Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians 14)
>
>Homosexuality:
>(Romans 1, 26)

>And even slavery (I Peter 2, 18):
>	"Servants, be subject to your masters with all fear; not only
>	to the good and gentle, but also to the froward"
>
>victor


And so it seems we come up to a basic contradiction :-)

And so you call and say:

"Yo Church, you are called to love, you take so much pride in the call...
but what of all these citations from your "own book" ... where do you 
*really* wish to stand?"

You'll see a lot of squirming but eventually you'll get the perhaps (or
perhaps not) grudging agreement that there's no way to "love everyone
and judge no one" and yet hate/oppress so many people.  And that a basic
choice is going to have to be made to remove this contradiction.

You will have started perestroika-ing the Christian tradition... ;-)


But in fairness, you'll see many Christians agreeing with you from the
start.  The abolishionist movement came about from exactly this kind of
re-evaluation:

Sure the Bible says nothing explicitely negative about the institution of
slavery ... but how can one treat the "least among us" as one would "Christ"
and allow slavery to continue?

The rest was about a century of history...

dennis
kriz@skat.usc.edu

gross@dg-rtp.dg.com (Gene Gross) (03/01/90)

In article <Feb.18.12.31.56.1990.12803@athos.rutgers.edu> jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) writes:
>
>Were the gas chambers used by the nazi's to execute wrath on him who
>practices evil?  Do not concern yourself with how the vengeance of
>the Lord is to be carried out, but rather remember that you will be
>judged by the same measure that you judge.  Could you, Patrick, pull
>the switch on Robert Alton Harris as he pleaded, moaned, and begged
>for mercy?
>
>If we cannot forgive a killer by sparing his life, how then is our
>Heavenly Father to forgive us?  If we cannot show mercy and compassion
>to those who are the sickest, how can we expect God to show us who
>are also sick, mercy and compassion?  I urge you to reconsider.  
>WE CANNOT AFFORD TO SIT IN JUDGEMENT.

Joe, question for you.  Was it right and proper to execute the Nazis at
the end of WWII?  What about Eichmann (sp?)?  Or what about the fellow
they've just sentenced to death for crimes committed at Triblinka as
Ivan the Terrible?

The passage in Romans isn't an excuse for any government to abuse its
citizens.  And I think that some of my more fundamentalist friends
could build a case capital punishment.  Personally, I am not sure that I
care to be the judge or jury, much less the executioner.

I look at my own life and wonder at the great gift that has been given
to me.  As I've grown as a Christian, I have found a path that is not
filled with the negatives.  It is a path full of love and light that not
only is for me, but also for anyone willing to reach out for it.  I do
not hold my position as above that of any of my brothers or sisters.  I
am only following the dictates and commands as I understand them.  To do
otherwise would be sin for me.

I'm willing to show compassion and mercy to anyone and everyone.  After
all, it has been shown to me when I deserved it least of all.  If God
can do that for me, I can't see how I can do any less.  I may not agree
with my more fundamentalist brethren on the question of capital
punishment, and some crimes that I read about or hear about on TV, cause
me pause to consider my position, but the simple fact is that I cannot
do otherwise than what I do.  I must love even my enemies and those that
despitefully use me.

Peace and Blessings,

Gene

jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) (03/04/90)

In article <Mar.1.02.53.19.1990.28327@athos.rutgers.edu> gross@dg-rtp.dg.com 
(Gene Gross) writes:
>Joe, question for you.  Was it right and proper to execute the Nazis at
>the end of WWII?  What about Eichmann (sp?)?  Or what about the fellow
>they've just sentenced to death for crimes committed at Triblinka as
>Ivan the Terrible?

If it had been me, I would have spared ( the Nazi's ) their lives.  And
thats coming from me, a Jew! ... I would spared Ceasecu's ( sp? ) life
as well.  I was sickened by the photos on the cover of Time and Newsweek.
As much as I realize some of these people got what was coming to them,
my concern is that people rise above the immediate need for revenge and
find room for compassion and mercy for even the unrepentant and proud ( as
must have been the case with Ceasescu ).  My concern is that people become
like you, Gene, who, can't help but love, and who would not care to be the
judge, jury much less the executioner.  My problem is that I see too many
people eager to play executioner.

>The passage in Romans isn't an excuse for any government to abuse its
>citizens.  And I think that some of my more fundamentalist friends
>could build a case capital punishment.  Personally, I am not sure that I
>care to be the judge or jury, much less the executioner.

Agreed.  I admit my Nazi example is a bit flimsy.  I suppose I wanted to
point the possible abuse of this understanding of the passage in Romans.
Yes, you can build a case for capital punishment in the Bible, in a legal,
cold, and logical kind of a way.  My pt. is that it is contrast to the 
Spirit of mercy, love and compassion that Jesus exemplified.  If one is
to truely imitate Christ, can one imagine Jesus pulling the switch on a
condemned man.  The same Christ who was nailed to the cross while saying
"Father, forgive them for they don't know what they do."  Would this man
support capital punishment?

>I'm willing to show compassion and mercy to anyone and everyone.  After
>all, it has been shown to me when I deserved it least of all.  If God
>can do that for me, I can't see how I can do any less.  I may not agree
>with my more fundamentalist brethren on the question of capital
>punishment, and some crimes that I read about or hear about on TV, cause
>me pause to consider my position, but the simple fact is that I cannot
>do otherwise than what I do.  I must love even my enemies and those that
>despitefully use me.

Thank you, Gene...for me its the lack of this kind of attitude in those
who are for capital punishment that bothers me.  And I think you have
clearly illustrated what I think I've been trying to say.  In our response
to God's overwhelming love and Grace, there shouldn't be any room for 
any other kinds of feelings esp. those that would lead to capital punishment.
We are willing to show compassion and mercy to anyone and everyone, including
those who hate us.  

Thanks again.



-- 
-jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov     "Its cool when we end it, its cool
-ames!elroy!jato!jrossi                when we end it..."
**********************STANDARD DISCLAIMER******************************  

rjb3@cbnewsk.ATT.COM (robert.j.brown) (03/06/90)

In article <Mar.1.02.53.19.1990.28327@athos.rutgers.edu>, 
gross@dg-rtp.dg.com (Gene Gross) writes:
> I'm willing to show compassion and mercy to anyone and everyone.  After
> all, it has been shown to me when I deserved it least of all.  If God
> can do that for me, I can't see how I can do any less.  I may not agree
> with my more fundamentalist brethren on the question of capital
> punishment, and some crimes that I read about or hear about on TV, cause
> me pause to consider my position, but the simple fact is that I cannot
> do otherwise than what I do.  I must love even my enemies and those that
> despitefully use me.

Gene,

If you were the only person involved, letting someone "despitefully"
(good Biblical term) use you would just be a matter of your conscience.

Life is not quite that simple.

What if some wild person breaks into your home at 3 am while you,
your wife, and babies are asleep ?  What is your responsibility to
the wild man, your other family members, to the Lord?  How do you
best love every one involved ?  What is the faith filled position
to take ?

There are many other painfully real scenarios I could paint.

By the way, you only have a few seconds to make the decision so
you better be prayed up and Spirit led.

! PLEASE: ANY EMAIL CONTACT --->  attmail!akgua!rjb

BB

dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu (David M Tate) (03/16/90)

In article <Mar.13.03.04.14.1990.13715@athos.rutgers.edu> jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) writes:
>
>Thats a very good point.  It would seem to me that those who favor
>capital punishment would just as soon deny a person thier chance to 
>learn about God, to be healed, to know God's mercy.
>
and
>
>Now its only my opinion that those who appeal to scriptures for justification
>for capital punishment, are trying to justify sinful feelings of vengeance,

Joe, I won't for a moment deny that some advocates of capital punishment are
motivated by a desire for vengeance.  However, to suggest that *all* such
advocates are simply nasty, vindictive people is an absurd straw-man argument.

I don't necessarily espouse capital punishment myself, but I hate to see it get
misportrayed this way as a simple black-and-white "vengeance" issue, without
any discussion of the real dilemmas involved.  Let's take it one point at a
time...

>[discussion of reaction to violence against one's own family deleted]
> .  But once the offender was apphrehended, even if the 
>burning rage in my being screamed for justice, I would oppose his death
>penalty.  Rather I would even shower him with all the love in the world,
>all the compassion in the world, all the love that I had for my loved
>one's whom he took from me in an act of violence.  

That's very noble, Joe. (no sarcasm intended).  Would you continue this while
he murdered someone else?  And another?  A family here, a child there?  How
long do you continue to let *him* abort people's chances to find God, in
order to give his soul every last chance?  Who knows how long it might take
to "cure" this person.  He might even be incurable.  In the meantime, are you
going to let him loose on society, so that he can duplicate the tragedy that
you're trying to avoid by saving his life?

Probably not.  So, you have to confine him, somehow.  Limit his freedom.  Put
him in a cage, with other animals.  This is going to make it difficult to
"shower him with love" in any way that he'll appreciate.  Let's face it, 
prison (and its kin) is a dismal failure in the reformation business.

In the meantime, you're spending hundreds of dollars a day to maintain this
person.  This money, if not needed there, could go to feed starving children
(more souls sent heavenward prematurely), or educate the poor, or any number
of causes with long-term rewards for many.

It's all very well to say that each person's life is infinitely valuable, and
deserves all our efforts at bringing him/her to salvation.  In practice, 
though, each of us has to choose where to direct our finite resources of time,
money, and energy.  
 
>Why?
>Because hatred only reinforces the feeling of seperateness that pushed him
>to kill in the first place.  To hate him, to call for his execution, to see
>in him only a monster who took my loved one's lives, is to push him farther

Hatred is a straw man.  Of course it is wrong.  But we're not talking about
hatred, we're talking about executing certain criminals.  One need not hate
the executed criminal, any more than one need hate the cancer that is cut out,
or the passenger for whom there is no room in the lifeboat.

>                  And if don't want to forgive and love our capital 
>offenders, why should God show us any forgiveness?

We can forgive and love *and* execute them.  (Again, I'm not necessarily
*advocating* this, but it remains an undiscusses possibility).  What else
does God do when he allows us to condemn ourselves?  He loves us no less.

The "judgement" warned against in the Bible is not legal judgement, but
moral judgement.  The judge who sends a criminal to death, in humility, and
with the thought "There but for the Grace of God go I", is not guilty of
violating the "Judge not, lest ye be judged" commandment.

>>I think an even better example might be the woman caught in adultery--a
>>stoning offense; that is, she was guilty of a capital offense.  Jesus'
>>response was most interesting, "Let him who is without sin cast the
>>first stone."  Not one remained to cast the first stone.

Personally, I think the best bet for a Christian opposition to capital
punishment is in the "turn the other cheek" passage.  This has extremely
wide-ranging consequences, if taken seriously.

Is this where you're coming from, Joe?


-- 
        David M. Tate       | "It made the basses of their being throb in    
  dtate@unix.cis.pitt.edu   |  witching chords, and their thin blood pulse
                            |  pizzicati of Hosanna..."
 "A Man for all Seasonings" |                     -- Wallace Stevens 

jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Joe Rossi) (03/16/90)

In article <Mar.13.03.15.49.1990.13786@athos.rutgers.edu> @sun.acs.udel.edu:correll@sun.acs.udel.edu (correll) writes:
>One of the problems with people's arguments about capital punishment is
>that everyone seems to be assuming that the motivation is personal
>vengence.  I would agree that vengence is not the proper motivation for
>a Christian, but I think there are other motivations that are backed by
>Scripture and appropriate:  justice, protection of society, deterrent to
>other criminals and would-be-criminals, etc.

Whenever people arguing for captial punishment talk about compassion for
the families of the victims, I conclude they mean we should respect 
their desire to see the murderer executed, at this can only mean sating
their need for vengeance.  I may be wrong but to me vengeance implies
justice i.e. killer x killed my family, therefore to make things even
I want him to die, because its fair.  Aren't fairness and justice 
similar.  Or on a more mundane level:  you hurt me, therefore I hurt
you back to make things even.

I think the moderator has a point when he says we can too easily appeal
to other rationalizations, when in truth, our real desire is purely
vengeance.  And why do we seek justice:  because we were made in God's
Image.  God is a God of justice, true, and seeks to make things fair,
but since we are fallen, we can no longer judge fairly.  Rather the
example we have from Jesus, is to be compassionate, as he was with the
adultress.

Protection of society can easily be accomplished with life long 
confinement.  Given the unpredictablity of human emotions, I encourage
life sentences without the possibilty of parole for capital offenders,
for their own sake as well as the sake of society.  We still should 
seek to heal, love, guide, counsel, and rehabiliate these people, and
make them understand that because of the violent nature of their crime
they have forfeited their right to live freely in the world.  At the
same time we can guide them to the inner love and peace of God.

Deterrence is the weakest argument since it has been demonstrated that
captial punishment does not deter the capital offender.  IMHO, he that
takes a life, has no regard for his own life, and most people kill out
of misdirected suicidal feelings.  Its called self-hatred.  What are
we supposed to do?  Act as accomplices to this suicide.  Help somebody
kill themself since they displayed the ultimate symptom of self-hatred.

No, we know what we are supposed to do.  IMHO, its a very serious sin
to take somebody's life when one has a choice.  I have demonstrated
very clearly how we should treat capital offenders.  We all have
free will.  If one chooses to be unrepentant, that is one's choice,
however in all fairness, I fear the same fate for those that support
capital punishment, that many fear for me.

God bless

Joe



-- 
-jrossi@jato.jpl.nasa.gov  "Now see all these people in front are  
-ames!elroy!jato!jrossi      getting horribly smashed here."
**********************STANDARD DISCLAIMER******************************