• 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!

The Poll about the Death Penalty -

Is the Death Penalty permitted by the New Testament?

  • Yes, the NT permits for the death penalty as determined by law

    Votes: 16 84.2%
  • Yes, But it should only be used sparingly - ie murder

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No sure

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • NO - It is a sin for the govt to apply the Death Penalty

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Other answer - please explain

    Votes: 3 15.8%

  • Total voters
    19
Status
Not open for further replies.

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
You lost me there. You say the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but you also say that the U.S. (not God's people, therefore the world) is sinning when practicing the death penalty. It seems like you are contradicting yourself. I don't get your point.
The World is the "outside" from which we were called (we do not judge those " outside). The World is already condemned. It is meaningless to try and make the World to stop being murderers, haters, adulterous, etc. They do not need to stop doing wrong things. They need the gospel.

But Christians are to be different. Christians are not to support abortion, the "death penalty", adultery, sexual immorality, etc.

When a Christian does support those things that Christian is dinning against God and Hod will judge that sinner (see 1 Peter and remember this is written to the church).

But when the Wirld supports abortion, the "death penalty", adultery, etc. this is the World being the World. They are already condemned and are bearing bad fruit indicative of the flesh.

Christians should bear fruit of the Spirit.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I am pretty confident DNA technology won't be disproven. Improved but not disproven.
Does not matter. Scripture requires the testimony of two witnesses (of God's people) to execute a member of the congregation for sinning against God. This is not about proof but God's voice in His people.

And by this standard Jesus sinned (per the Law Jesus had an obligation to stone the woman caught in adultry).
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Does not matter. Scripture requires the testimony of two witnesses (of God's people) to execute a member of the congregation for sinning against God. This is not about proof but God's voice in His people.

And by this standard Jesus sinned (per the Law Jesus had an obligation to stone the woman caught in adultry).
Jesus did not stop the stoning.
I don't know what you talking about "Gods voice in His people."
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Did He encourage them to do their due diligence? Why did Jesus not kill her Himself?
It was a trap set for Him. Justice was not their objective. Caught in the very act. The man was not there being stoned. Justice was not the object. Trapping Jesus was the object.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
It was a trap set for Him. Justice was not their objective. Caught in the very act. The man was not there being stoned. Justice was not the object. Trapping Jesus was the object.
So Jesus did the wrong thing so as not to fall into a trap?

The others has alreforgiveness.

Jesus knew her sin.
BUT He did not condemn her.

The women who would be put to death under the law was forgiven.
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So Jesus did the wrong thing so as not to fall into a trap?

The others has alreforgiveness.

Jesus knew her sin.
BUT He did not condemn her.

The women who would be put to death under the law was forgiven.
Did Jesus do the wrong thing?
He did not tell them to stone her or not to stone her.
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
Did Jesus do the wrong thing?
He did not tell them to stone her or not to stone her.
He actually did. He said "let those among you who have not sinned cast the first stone". Whoever cast the first stone would be denying they had sinned.

They did not set a trap. Jesus had the trap was already set....and it was not to trap Jesus.

Do you believe Jesus should have stoned her or forgiven her?

Why?
 

Reynolds

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
He actually did. He said "let those among you who have not sinned cast the first stone". Whoever cast the first stone would be denying they had sinned.

They did not set a trap. Jesus had the trap was already set....and it was not to trap Jesus.

Do you believe Jesus should have stoned her or forgiven her?

Why?
I think you missed the entire point of the story. The trap was set for Jesus and He turned the situation.

You got me thinking so I consulted Macarthur.
"8:6 a trap . . . accusing him. If Jesus rejected the law of Moses (Lev 20:10; Dt 22:22), His credibility would be gone. If He held to Mosaic law, His reputation for compassion and forgiveness would have been questioned.

8:7 any one of you who is without sin. This directly refers to Dt 13:9; 17:7, where the witnesses of a crime are to start the execution. Only those who were not guilty of the same sin could participate."

Just as I thought.
 

Dave G

Well-Known Member
Peter did
Notice what happened after Peter cut off the ear of one of the ones that was intent on capturing the Lord:

" And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear.
52 Then said Jesus unto him,
Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
53 Thinkest thou that I cannot now pray to my Father, and he shall presently give me more than twelve legions of angels?
54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?"
( Matthew 26:51-54 ).

He told Peter to put it away.

I also believe that the reason that He told the 11 to go out and buy a sword in the first place ( Luke 22:35-38 ), was so that He could then turn around and heal the ear of the one whose ear was cut off, to show them one final act of God's mercy and power before He was led away.

My friend, as believers we are to seek peace and to ensue ( pursue ) it.
The Lord does not want us taking up "the sword".
Nevertheless, I still agree with stiff penalties imposed by secular governments for heinous crimes committed against my fellow man,
as I know what a deterrent those penalties can be against further commission of those crimes.

The death penalty for pre-meditated murder is one of those that I agree with.
 
Last edited:

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I think you missed the entire point of the story. The trap was set for Jesus and He turned the situation.

You got me thinking so I consulted Macarthur.
"8:6 a trap . . . accusing him. If Jesus rejected the law of Moses (Lev 20:10; Dt 22:22), His credibility would be gone. If He held to Mosaic law, His reputation for compassion and forgiveness would have been questioned.

8:7 any one of you who is without sin. This directly refers to Dt 13:9; 17:7, where the witnesses of a crime are to start the execution. Only those who were not guilty of the same sin could participate."

Just as I thought.
They tried to trap Jesus. But the actual trap was for them:


Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die—the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel.

If Jesus was following the Law then He would indeed have to kill the woman. There is no forgiveness for murder, adultery, sinning "with a high hand", etc. under the Law. No sacrifice could be made to cover such sins. They had to die.

The reason they did not kill her was not that they were involved in adultery (that is adding to Scripture and John MacArthur should know better). The reason was their consciences were pricked to the realization they had sinned.


John 8:9 Then those who heard it, being convicted by their conscience, went out one by one, beginning with the oldest even to the last.

This dies not apply anyway. We are not called to kill the sinner.
 

37818

Well-Known Member
I was curious about your state commentary so I looked it up for New Jersey and yes they honored the Church of England then... but I also found this, In recent years, irreligion has been an increasing force in Jersey, with two fifths of the population identifying as having no religion. This number rises to 52% for Jersey people under 35.

So NJ is fast turning into a irreligious state.
You do realize I was referring to the original 13 States. Religion in the Original 13 Colonies - Under God - ProCon.org
And I did not realize how many of those states actually had none.
 

rlvaughn

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
So to clarify, the death penalty is a sin but not to the world but to the Christian.
The World is the "outside" from which we were called (we do not judge those " outside). The World is already condemned. It is meaningless to try and make the World to stop being murderers, haters, adulterous, etc.
I cannot see how you reconcile the assertions you are making. If the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but to the Christian, and, if you bolster this argument by saying it is meaningless to try to make the world stop being murderers, haters, and adulterers, are you not in effect arguing that -- like the death penalty -- murder, hate, and adultery are only sins for Christians?
 

JonC

Moderator
Moderator
I cannot see how you reconcile the assertions you are making. If the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but to the Christian, and, if you bolster this argument by saying it is meaningless to try to make the world stop being murderers, haters, and adulterers, are you not in effect arguing that -- like the death penalty -- murder, hate, and adultery are only sins for Christians?
It's my wording (I am wrong to say "not a sin to the world").

What I mean is the World is already condemned. Sin is expected. But Christians are not to be like the lost.

A Christian who advocates abortion, the death penalty, sexual immorality, etc. sins against God in a different way than dies the World as Christians are saved, are not condemned, and should know better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top