• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Jesus and the death Penalty?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HeirofSalvation

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Creation ordinances are not to be despised. You can show no place where this is over turned. You cannot find Jesus over turning the laws He gave.
Your comment does not demonstrate a proper view of the law.

Failing to carry out the death penalty brings the nation further under the judgement of God.

:thumbs::thumbs: Christ quoted the book of Genesis more than any other O.T. book. (49 times if memory serves.) Genesis is referred to or quoted in the N.T. more than any other book in the O.T.

When asked about his position on marriage, Jesus went straight to the Garden itself in order to explain God's establishment of a Universal principle. Whatever Jesus' opinion about Capital Punishment was.....it would have agreed with God's revelation in Genesis, and Genesis is clear on the topic.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
For all those who believe we should be following an Old Testament ethic instead of what Jesus taught, why are you not out stoning adulterers?

A sophomoric argument at best that fails to recognize that today's death penalty is the equivalent to stoning.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
I won't quibble too much, that's fine. I was simply referencing the ending of someone's life. In the end, the individual is dead.

To the larger point of your post. I don't know of anyone opposed to the death penalty that advocates the absence of judgment for criminals. They are opposed to government sanctioned execution of criminals. This flawed premise is unfortunately common. Justice doesn't have to be deadly to be justice.

BTW I oppose the death penalty for multitude of reasons some practical others theological. Don't know if I have made that clear on this thread though on other threads I have.

Exactly. Taking a life is taking a life. And no where that I have seen in the NT does God give man the right to exact the final judgment of taking a life.

He gave the command to do it in the OT. But in the NT His command is to forgive 70 x 7.

And so again, if we're gonna say that God gave government the authority to take a life, we shouldn't have a problem with abortion.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Exactly. Taking a life is taking a life. And no where that I have seen in the NT does God give man the right to exact the final judgment of taking a life.

False premise, it is incorrect to suggest that if it is not specifically given permission in the NT then it is either wrong or a sin.

He gave the command to do it in the OT. But in the NT His command is to forgive 70 x 7.

Which has no application to the justice system in our government. If it did we could never punish anyone.

And so again, if we're gonna say that God gave government the authority to take a life, we shouldn't have a problem with abortion.

Begging the question fallacy
 

Mexdeaf

New Member
Logic and the Scriptures just aren't some people's strong suit. It's really simple- God has not changed from Genesis.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
False premise, it is incorrect to suggest that if it is not specifically given permission in the NT then it is either wrong or a sin.

Then it's also a false premise to assume the contrary. At least you're acknowledging that God has not given the go ahead for us to take a life.



Which has no application to the justice system in our government. If it did we could never punish anyone.

Unless I'm mistaken, the OP wasn't about the justice system but rather Jesus and the death penalty. And if there was Biblical continuation of capital punishment from the OT into the NT.

Everything Jesus taught seems to say otherwise when it comes to His people and where they should stand on life.

As I've said many times in the past, when we author confusion about something, it's because it's of US and not of GOD.

You can't say that He authorizes us to kill in one instance (capital punishment) while not okaying another (abortion).

God is ALWAYS consistent. Taking a life is taking a life and He HAS NOT given us the authority that I see in the NT to take a life.

What sin has a murderer committed that according to Jesus, we too haven't committed? if you break one, you break them all.

So speaking from what Jesus says and taught, He seems to be extending mercy and forgiveness rather than directing us to take the life of someone whose sin is no greater than our own.



Begging the question fallacy

Ignoring the truth fallacy.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
False premise, it is incorrect to suggest that if it is not specifically given permission in the NT then it is either wrong or a sin.



Which has no application to the justice system in our government. If it did we could never punish anyone.



Begging the question fallacy

This well meaning response offered by Liberals. is the product of trying to walk in love more than what is required by scrupture.

You have correctly pointed out that no crime would ever be punished is we used this rationale:thumbsup:
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
This well meaning response offered by Liberals. is the product of trying to walk in love more than what is required by scrupture.

You have correctly pointed out that no crime would ever be punished is we used this rationale:thumbsup:

I haven't read the entire thread. But the OP is about the death penalty and thus punishing to death. It is not about refusing punishment for every crime, but merely refusing to not punish to the point of death.

So liberals are anti-kill when it comes to adults but conservatives are anti-kill when it comes to babies?
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
I haven't read the entire thread. But the OP is about the death penalty and thus punishing to death. It is not about refusing punishment for every crime, but merely refusing to not punish to the point of death.

He was responding to your post #144 where you said:

"He gave the command to do it in the OT. But in the NT His command is to forgive 70 x 7".

He was pointing out how that argument, if you are consistent, will mean that no punishment can ever be given because according to your logic everyone must be forgiven. If they are forgiven then no punishment can be given out at all.
 

Iconoclast

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
:thumbs::thumbs: Christ quoted the book of Genesis more than any other O.T. book. (49 times if memory serves.) Genesis is referred to or quoted in the N.T. more than any other book in the O.T.

When asked about his position on marriage, Jesus went straight to the Garden itself in order to explain God's establishment of a Universal principle. Whatever Jesus' opinion about Capital Punishment was.....it would have agreed with God's revelation in Genesis, and Genesis is clear on the topic.

Most theologians of note point out that what is revealed in Genesis 1-11 set the stage for all of life and redemptive history.

From GTY;http://www.gty.org/resources/bible-introductions/MSB01

In this book of beginnings, God revealed Himself and a worldview to Israel which contrasted, at times sharply, with the worldview of Israel’s neighbors. The author made no attempt to defend the existence of God or to present a systematic discussion of His person and works. Rather, Israel’s God distinguished Himself clearly from the alleged gods of her neighbors. Theological foundations are revealed which include God the Father, God the Son, God the Holy Spirit, man, sin, redemption, covenant, promise, Satan and angels, kingdom, revelation, Israel, judgment, and blessing.

Genesis 1–11 (primeval history) reveals the origins of the universe, i.e., the beginnings of time and space and many of the firsts in human experience, such as marriage, family, the Fall, sin, redemption, judgment, and nations. Genesis 12–50 (patriarchal history) explained to Israel how they came into existence as a family whose ancestry could be traced to Eber (hence the “Hebrews”; Gen. 10:24, 25) and even more remotely to Shem, the son of Noah (hence the “Semites”; Gen. 10:21). God’s people came to understand not only their ancestry and family history, but also the origins of their institutions, customs, languages, and different cultures, especially basic human experiences such as sin and death.

J
OURNAL OF
D
ISPENSATIONAL
T
HEOLOGY

April 2011
13
Sin and Death


As previously discussed, every major Christian doctrine flows from a proper
literal interpretation of the text of Genesis 1

11. Foundational elements of
these chapters include their focus upon sin, death, and redemption.
Furthermore, in order to fully unde
rstand the significance of this problem

sin
and death

one must not only look to the Old Testament, but the New
Testament also. The Old Testament provides the historical reference point to
the exact moment when sin entered the world, with all of its ramific
ations.
The New Testament elaborates on the theological implications of those
actions described in Genesis. The book of Romans, in particular, provides the
basis for the belief that death is the result of sin; therefore, prior to sin
entering the world no
living creature experienced death (cf. Rom 5:12).



from a biblical perspective
For this reason, a proper interpretation of the first eleven chapters of
the book of Genesis is of paramount importance to Christianity as a whole.
The chief reason for this concern is b
ecause any misunderstanding of Genesis
regarding creation, the fall of man, or the Flood, will ultimately result in the
loss of the need for a Savior

Jesus Christ.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
He was responding to your post #144 where you said:

"He gave the command to do it in the OT. But in the NT His command is to forgive 70 x 7".

Y'all communicating via PM now that you know what he was referring to?

He was pointing out how that argument, if you are consistent, will mean that no punishment can ever be given because according to your logic everyone must be forgiven. If they are forgiven then no punishment can be given out at all.

I haven't given an argument . Just pointing out what Scripture says. And my point was in reference to punishing unto DEATH.

God gave the okay to do that in the OT. He did not in the NT. That does not mean that people cannot be punished. I'm simply saying it would be inconsistent with what else Scripture says. Unless we are putting to death everyone and we are not, where does the notion come from that God is okay with us punishing some to death and not others when Scripture says if you have broken one , you have broken them all.

So if He is okay with us punishing one person to death for his transgressions, why would He not equally be okay with punishing us all to death for our equal transgressions.

10 For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it. 11 For he who said, “You shall not commit adultery,” also said, “You shall not murder.”[c] If you do not commit adultery but do commit murder, you have become a lawbreaker.

12 Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, 13 because judgment without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgment.
James 2:10-13
 

Thomas Helwys

New Member
A sophomoric argument at best that fails to recognize that today's death penalty is the equivalent to stoning.

An ignorant response at best that fails to realize that Jesus condemned those who were about to stone the woman caught in adultery.

Now all you self-appointed determiners of God's mind on the matter can continue your stone collecting and ignore what Jesus taught.
 

Oldtimer

New Member
An ignorant response at best that fails to realize that Jesus condemned those who were about to stone the woman caught in adultery.

Now all you self-appointed determiners of God's mind on the matter can continue your stone collecting and ignore what Jesus taught.

Talk about throwing rocks.......... :tonofbricks:

Especially in view of this:
Originally Posted by Thomas Helwys
Had to go back all the way to Genesis for support of you position, huh? I have to go back only as far as Jesus for support of mine.

For all those who believe we should be following an Old Testament ethic instead of what Jesus taught, why are you not out stoning adulterers?

Who used "self-appointed determination" to throw out the entire OT to make his case?

Did Jesus stop murder by an angry "lynch" mob or a death sentence arrived upon by due process?

Jesus, Himself, submitted to a death sentence arrived upon by due process. Even though innocent and with the POWER to commute His sentence, He submitted. And asked for forgiveness of those who did not know He was innocent. Of all the possible ways He could have chosen to allow His blood to be shed for us, why did He allow due process to be the method?

Did He submit to capital punishment? If we are to follow the example, He set for us doesn't that include recognization that the death penalty established in Genesis still stands?
 

Thomas Helwys

New Member
Talk about throwing rocks.......... :tonofbricks:

Especially in view of this:


Who used "self-appointed determination" to throw out the entire OT to make his case?

Did Jesus stop murder by an angry "lynch" mob or a death sentence arrived upon by due process?

Jesus, Himself, submitted to a death sentence arrived upon by due process. Even though innocent and with the POWER to commute His sentence, He submitted. And asked for forgiveness of those who did not know He was innocent. Of all the possible ways He could have chosen to allow His blood to be shed for us, why did He allow due process to be the method?

Did He submit to capital punishment? If we are to follow the example, He set for us doesn't that include recognization that the death penalty established in Genesis still stands?

I can't believe your using Jesus' non-resistance to try to prove your point. Amazing.
 

Oldtimer

New Member
I can't believe your using Jesus' non-resistance to try to prove your point. Amazing.

Did you bother to actually read what I wrote?

Jesus did not resist His death. You don't agree that He could have chosen something other than "capital punishment" to become the final blood sacrifice to cover the sins of those who believe in Him? From the time Christ breathed life into dust, until the time Jesus said, "It is finished", His plan was in place.

Why capital punishment? Why not capital punishment?

Instead of ridiculing the point, as Joe Biden often did during debate last fall, make your case against it.
 

Revmitchell

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
An ignorant response at best that fails to realize that Jesus condemned those who were about to stone the woman caught in adultery.

Really? Show me the verse where he condemned stoning or capital punishment.

Now all you self-appointed determiners of God's mind on the matter can continue your stone collecting and ignore what Jesus taught.

A contradictory statement.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Did Jesus stop murder by an angry "lynch" mob or a death sentence arrived upon by due process?

Both. They were angry and they reached their conclusion through the due process of their culture. She was caught in adultery. he due process said she was to be stoned to death.

Jesus, Himself, submitted to a death sentence arrived upon by due process. Even though innocent and with the POWER to commute His sentence, He submitted. And asked for forgiveness of those who did not know He was innocent. Of all the possible ways He could have chosen to allow His blood to be shed for us, why did He allow due process to be the method?

So because there is due process, it's okay to take a life? According to Jesus, He GAVE His life. It was not taken through due process. And if due process was the key, then, as previously said, He should have allowed them to kill the woman caught in adultery as they arrived at her sentence through the due process of applying their laws.

Did He submit to capital punishment?

Umm, NO He did not. Punishment entails that someone did something wrong. And Jesus did no wrong so I don't believe we can glean from Scripture that Jesus allowing Himself to be killed was His okay for capital punishment.

If we are to follow the example, He set for us doesn't that include recognization that the death penalty established in Genesis still stands?

That was a penalty from GOD, not from man. Which is essentially the purpose of the OP. Man is exacting punishment unto death and it doesn't look as though Scripture has given man that right.
 

Zaac

Well-Known Member
Did you bother to actually read what I wrote?

Jesus did not resist His death. You don't agree that He could have chosen something other than "capital punishment" to become the final blood sacrifice to cover the sins of those who believe in Him?


He died the way He had intended to die and it was not punishment. It was an unrighteous murder of someone who hadn't done anything wrong. It is a way off mark stretch to attempt to use Jesus's death on the Cross as an endorsement of punishment unto death.

From the time Christ breathed life into dust, until the time Jesus said, "It is finished", His plan was in place.

Indeed it was. But that plan didn't have anything to do with His death being an endorsement for men to kill other men. They unrighteously killed Him so why would He endorse man making final judgment of life and death upon another man especially when breaking one law means you've broken them all and thus all are equally and righteously due the same punishment?

And from the Scripture in James 2 alone it would appear that we would all have to be hypocrites to endorse punishment unto death for one sin but not our own when Scripture says you break one, you've broken them all.

Why capital punishment? Why not capital punishment?

Not because that authority rests with God ALONE, not sinful men.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top