h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

One of God's commandments is 'Thou shalt not kill'. This is a clear express command not to kill and so surely NO believer in the Christian God can believe that CP is right.

The old 'eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth' argument is rubbish. It does not explicitly state anything about killing, which the commandment does.
(I presume - being no expert - it relates to any punishment/response/reaction to a particular act being kept in proportion to that act.)


How can anyone who believes in God dismiss one of his direct commands and support CP?
Surely in the eyes of a Christian - whatever man's practical reaction to a criminal act - God is the only one that should have power over life and death?

Just doing a reality check here.

In which century did the church denounce the death penalty? I don't recall that ever happening from any branch of the Christian church. Seems to me that thousands have died at the hands of fine Christians only doing their duty. Little more than a hundred years ago dozens died by fire, torture, mutilation, starvation, stoning just to list a few methods. That was described historicly as the Salem Witch trials. Hundreds of years before were the inquisitions. In rural countries the death penalty to non believers (pagans) is still practiced.

Just questions?

As for the "eye for an eye", I guess you have to read a diffrent version of your "Bible" to see that part. There are hundreds of versions translated and adopted by the Christian churches through out the world.

Actually this raises an interesting point.

Does anyone know what the Catholic Church's current stance is on the death penalty, given:

1)It's historical role and actions 'in the name of God', and
2)It's opposition to abortion?

~A~

My question was not based on the particular views of any particular part of the Christian World (although I'm sure there are some interesting views out there!) but rather on what it says in the Bible and how Chrisitans feel the scripture relates to this subject.

By the way, I'm an atheist. I'm just interested in the viewpoints of Christians on this since there seem to be so many people who claim to believe in God and yet make no attempt to follow his clear instructions (as opposed to those who try and fail or those who admit they don't know what they should do).

I think this discussion points up the inevitable inconsistencies inherent in calling oneself "Christian" or a member of any of the established churches, sects, religions, what have you. The pope is currently against capital punishment, but the pope of one hundred years ago wasn't. Part of the bible endorses killing, part of it doesn't. People have been killing each other in the name of religion for as long as it has been around. A brief list of recent murders carried out in the name of a god or with the belief that a god supports the action: Doctors who perform abortion in the USA, Tamils/ Sinhalese in Sri Lanka, Palestinians/ Jews in Israel, American soldiers on the USS Cole in Yemen.

A "Christian" may believe anything he wants to and blame it on the God.

Thanks to Project Gutenberg, I can give you the precise text from Matthew 5 (in the King James version) where Jesus explicitly repudiates the old doctrine of retribution and propounds instead the new convenant of forgiveness. Which also gives us the aphorisms "turn the other cheek" and "to go the extra mile," and reminds us that "neither a borrower nor a lender be" is not the Bible but Shakespeare. Whatever your parents told you

Matthew 5 vv 38 - 42

38: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40: And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

41: And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42: Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

Perhaps "Dubyah" should check his WWJD bracelet before he orders the next execution in Texas.

A very intelligent point, if I may be so bold. An eye for an eye is the old Jewish law, and could have been used to decide the punishment for violation of not only the commandments but any of the dozens of detailed laws contained in the Books of the Law, as I understand it (though I am not a Talmudic scholar).

This was the old covenant, one of obedience. One of the abiding preoccupations of the Gospels is Jesus' challenge to this old order. Remember the saying "it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven?" - This was Jesus' explanation to his followers when a rich man came to him, told him that he obeyed all the commandments and asked him what else he should do to achieve salvation. Jesus told him to give all he had to the poor, and the man went away somewhat upset. The whole point of the New Testament - and therefore the crucial difference between Christianity and Judaism - is the New Covenant under which we can achieve forgiveness.

So, to answer your question, you are absolutely correct. No Christian should support the death penalty as it is fundamentally at odds with the New Testament teaching of "hate the sin, love the sinner." Nobody, not even a murderer, is inherently beyond redemption. And even if they were, it is not our place to judge (or, to put it in terms the average Biblical scholar might find acceptable, "Judge not, that ye be not judged" - Matthew 7:11, one of the more succint verses in the Gospels).

Any Christians out there willing to argue for the death penalty?

Where were all you peaceful Christians during the last several wars?

Driving ambulances.

Or in Canada.

The problem is that most of you can't see the difference between the what has been told and what has been done:
I don't know if I can call myself a christian, for I'm only trying to do the 'good' (whatever it may be), but my point is that christian are human beings: the christian part is supposed to be perfect, but the the human part is also only human; the human part has a lot to say in our behaviour. The past mistakes the christians made are not because the bible is bad, but because *human beings* are trying to behav like they think they should... It's the same with communism and Marxism: Marxism being a book or a theory isn't too wrong, but it only works in an ideal world where workers are not like the employers, ie selfish. Communism failed because the world isn't ideal: some people are selfish and most of the time, these people can gain money and power from the idealists... See h2g2 (2)
'Those who want power should absolutely be held away from it' (D. Adams said it with other words, but that's the message)

Therefore Christianity fails because the world isn't ideal? More likely it fails because it is a faulty belief system created by faulty humans. The fact is, the bible advocates all kinds of wacky scary stuff, mass religions tend to pit people against each other- believers vs. nonbelievers, and large organized churches are inherently corrupt. Therefore I reject the premise that the "chrisitian" part of humans are perfect. Side note:
Personally, I feel the bible is bad when it says I'm going to suffer eternal pain because I'm an unbeliever - also an integral tenet of Christianity, I believe.

Humans are not perfect, as Christianity believes. My question is not based on what people might do, but rather on what they think they should do.

I find it a strange Western Christian in the modern era who argues for the death penalty. I just wondered what arguments, if any, could be advanced by Christians who believed in the death penalty.

While I mostly agree with Horse with no name, I think there is another point to be added to this discussion. Just for the sake of accuracy, I have been made to understand that the commandment quoted as "Thou shalt not kill" is more accurately translated as "Thou shalt not commit murder." I'm told that the word is much more specific than "kill". I'm not saying I think we're free to kill or that I am in favor of capital punishment, but I just wanted to add this clarification and point out that a Christian might be able to use that fact as justification for a pro-CP stance.

Good day,
Scottworthy

Actually what it says is that everybody is goint to suffer eternal torment, but if you face up to the things you do wrong and sincerely try to do better, you'll be forgiven. Which is wholly more positive.

It does indeed say thou shalt not commit murder, but as I pointed out earlier the Commandments are the old covenant - Jewish law - whereas the new covenant has the doctrine of forgiveness. One of the reasons they nailed that bloke to a bit of wood was precisely that he was challenging the old order which would stone people to death for adultery.

'More likely it fails because it is a [...] belief system created by faulty humans.'
Sorry, Huw B., but that's how I more or less meant it: I think everyone will agree that the idea of being kind to your 'brother' is great, and I think this was Jesus' main message (maybe I'm wrong, but who knows? If he has existed he's been dead for some 2000 years now) But it was worked out and interpreted by humans, which are, indeed, faulty (and I'm not going to argue whether Jesus was human or not)
BTW Idon't agree with everything that's written in the Bible.
The fact that I said 'The "christian" part is perfect....' doesn't mean that someone who doesn't beleave in God is 'bad'; for me, religion has always been a tool to become "human": some need it, some don't...
Sorry, I couldn't think of any better word than human. (Suggestions are welcome)

Sorry again, I got the name wrong, I meant 'Sorry, evilwombat...', of course

The horse who shall remain nameless:
If everyone can agree that we need to be kind to our brothers, which you believe is Jesus' main message, why do we need the whole unwieldy christianity framework? I believe you are right, everyone can believe in the peace and love part. That is also why I think the rest of the details associated with religions - holy books, holy wars, chosen people, etc... are so objectionable and so extraneous. They act to divide rather than unite.
I think we are talking about two different things, to you christianity = love your brother
to me Christianity =love your christian brother, save all the poor non-christians, and follow all the other stuff associated with the organized church.