Christianity and capital punishment

[EdithSimcox]

Another dinner table argument. Basic internet research indicates we are both right. But that seems so wrong...

So, DP's view is that yet another reason why it makes no sense to be Christian is that Christians believe in things like capital punishment - citing a kind of US bible belt enthusiasm for the death penalty as being based on biblical authority ("an eye for an eye" etc) and modern secular human rights standards as the counter to that. But to me, and I admit I'm no biblical scholar (or scholar of any kind come to that), the very concept of capital punishment is inherently un-Christian. A religion which promotes loving your enemy, forgiveness, turning the other cheek, and God's infinite mercy cannot possibly be one which should also approve - in this day and age - of the death penalty. I also think that it is inevitable that the Bible is full of apparent acceptance of things we find abhorrent or irrelevant because it was written in different times. So it is not surprising that in those days the death penalty was more accepted. But now we have other ways of protecting the public, and rehabilitation and so on so there's no excuse.

So, in the 21st century, is continued support for capital punishment compatible with Christianity? Is it common amongst MOTR Christians?

[quencher]

After reading this whole thread and my little understanding of Christianity and God, I would say that probably the reason for the contradiction in the bible is based on how a believer understands the Bible and god's actions. Thomas aquinas tries to explain this in his third way in the theory of metaphysics. He says that unaided human reason cannot have direct knowledge of things beyond our realm. God and Angels outstrip the human intellect's capacity to know. The only way we can gain access is when God and Angels reveal themselves to humans via revelation. In this instance, it's the different forms Christians say they receive their information from God which can include things like dreams, Visions, miracles etc. 

When studying God's action and how he deals with his creation, I find that there is a lot of contradiction in regards to capital punishment. I would go as far as to say that God has given every human being who has been born and will be born the capital punishment. The fact that according to the book of Genesis God created dam and eve in his image. When they ate one of the forbidden fruits, One of their punishment is death at the end of their life cycle. It is also to follow through to all future generations. 

Omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and with his loving nature upon humans constitute gods characteristic to his people. Our understanding of his actions refutes the basis of them all. He could have foreseen what was to happen and have the power to fix his creation. Or he would have had the knowledge in the first place and created a world without evil, fault or flaws. It would give a bad impression on what kind of person he is if he knew that what he created was good and yet it was destroyable. Thomas aquinas would have disagreed with me and said that the absence of good is evil.  Evil itself does not exist. 

We could say that  Adam and Eve were created with free will. The power to decide on wether they would commit that original sin or not and any other future actions. We have that free will too. This is debatable whether it's a flaw or not in god's creation. The Ten Commandments makes God come across like a jealous person with controlling issues. Telling people you are free to do what you want but don't disobey me. From number 1-4 is all about himself. Your free will is within his limits. 

The ten commandment which features in both Deuteronomy and exodus comes as a set of law for god's people to follow. Not really Christians because this was before Christ. It is used by Christians as a template for what was and Jesus's teaching as what is. Jesus agreed with the Decalogue but seems to disagree with how people were treated when they break the law of Moses. God never stated that the people who commit adultery should be stoned to death. Moses did. I would assume this is where cultural influence on how to serve justice comes in to play. Humans given a set of rules and left to interpretation and how to apply it. With Jesus he tells his followers about not following the teachers of the laws and the Pharisees actions but to follow what they say or teach i.e the ten commandments. The actions would have been influenced by everything else around them. 

Thou shall not kill still contradicts what God has set out for humans in Genesis and also the fact that he allowed for his son to suffer the very thing he condemns which is killing. Jesus came on earth purposely to be killed in-order for his followers to gain redemption. Jesus may say that he disagrees with capital punishment but he suffered the very thing knowingly. If we are to believe what is said. Talking about body and blood at the last supper as preparation for his own death. I would go as far as to say it could be called suicide or premeditated murder. 

Other than the reason for Jesus selfless premeditated death to save others. He preached about love, acceptance and believed in forgiveness. He would have disagreed with capital punishment of others as people have given examples above. 
I also think that it is why the Catholic Church disagree with suicide because they believe that you won't be able to repent your sin of murder. It's also the basis for the stance they have on abortion (do not kill ). Scholars debate when life begins and for some Christians especially Catholics it's from the moment of conception. scientist have managed to come up with what stage and less harmful and different countries have different laws. 

[quencher]

Oh know am still typing this an not paying attention and pressed send. Please don't pay attention to the above. I will write it properly.

[capsium]

Bolognese the reason I chose to express myself using negative statements was to highlight my belief that not being in support of the death penalty (as many Christian posters on this thread stated their stance) is compatible with Christianity.

Yes, that is not to say that a belief the death penalty is necessary is incompatible with Christianity either, but since this stance, within the believers I know, is something I have little experience of, I instead phrased my post using language in line with my experiences.

Yes, a more neutral statement would be to talk about opinion being 'divided', once this is established, but I was speaking initially from experience and then in response to posters who seemed to be claiming, my own and similar thinking people's stance, was incompatible with Christianity.

[Bolognese]

capsium your dancing on the head of a pin. You have said (capsium Sat 12-Mar-16 20:30:00) that you dont claim to be in a group (christianity) that is completly against the death penalty. Which is akin to saying the group (christianity) that you are in, is partly pro the death penalty.

Wouldn't it be more correct to say christianity as a group has a divided opinion on the matter and therefore cannot claim to have a definitive position on it?

[capsium]

Where did I claim that, Bolognese? I can't find it (tried advanced search) and if I did say that it must have been in error.

I don't believe Christianity is incompatible with not supporting the death penalty, which is subtly different to saying the death penalty is never, ever justifiable in extreme circumstances. Deciding what circumstance the death penalty is justifiable, though, is always fraught with difficulty - it is not a choice I would ever want to have to make myself.

[Bolognese]

"I didn't claim to be in a group which is wholly against the death penalty"... and that's why I find it hard to understand how you can claim 'christianity as a whole' is incompatible with the death penalty, when you admit it clearly isn't to significant numbers of christians.

[capsium]

Bolognese I didn't claim to be in a group which is wholly against the death penalty, I just pointed out there are many Christians, including those who posted on this thread, who do not support the death penalty.

Christianity is a big religion, with many followers, there is much diversity in the faith - which in one way is good (complete church unity aside for one moment) because no matter what a person's starting point there will be an aspect within Christianity to connect with.

[Bolognese]

capsium- but you haven't have you, you still call your self christian, you still use the same bible with the same heinous acts in them, I imagine you go to a christian church.

Why not leave the christian religion, start capsianity and publish a new bible cutting out all the abhorrent bits? Then you could credible claim to be in a group against the death penalty.

[capsium]

I would propose if I was in a group where some of the members committed heinous acts and some didn't I would leave that group and start a new one. Barring that the whole group can justifiably be called complicit.

Bolognese this is exactly what has happened, throughout the history of the Christian church, with different denominations arising from schisms.

[Bolognese]

OutwiththeOutCrowd - yes I agree with your summary of the debate. You didn't make a conclusion though (probably deliberate lol)?

I would propose if I was in a group where some of the members committed heinous acts and some didn't I would leave that group and start a new one. Barring that the whole group can justifiably be called complicit.

[OutwiththeOutCrowd]

Does the Bible support capital punishment or not?

From my perspective as an outsider I would say it does and it doesn’t! Those who are of a forgiving disposition and don’t back capital punishment will find passages in the Bible to shore up their position. Those who are more judgemental and back capital punishment will likewise find passages to shore up theirs.

It is rare to find a person who will say that everything in their heart tells them capital punishment is right/wrong but they feel compelled to adopt the opposite view because it is in the Bible.

I think most people are aware of passages showing Jesus as a progressive who is forgiving of sin, but Jesus is also depicted as a traditionalist upholding the OT laws.

For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled

St Augustine wrote:

Therefore, it is in no way contrary to the commandment, 'Thou shalt not kill' to wage war at God's bidding, or for the representatives of public authority to put criminals to death, according to the law, that is, the will of the most just reason.

The Christian establishment has, for most of its history, adhered to this sentiment.

The Church of England and the Catholic Church are both now against the death penalty but neither can boast of a long and noble struggle campaigning for its abolition. In fact, as recently as the late 1940s, the bishops in the House of Lords helped to stymie a bill calling for the abolition (suspension) of the death penalty that had already been passed by the House of Commons. The bishops went on to change their mind on the issue some ten years later, lagging behind liberal political reformers in their viewpoint yet still ahead of the curve with respect to the general population who remained strongly in favour of the death penalty at that time.

It’s interesting to note that Quakers have been consistently against the death penalty, as have Unitarians. (The Unitarian stance might not be surprising given that there was a time in the UK when it was possible to be put to death for not believing in the trinity.)

[headinhands]

Jesus shows what God (absolutely moral) looks like within a linear time frame.

Why would a loving, gentle, emphatic being allow themselves to be portrayed for 4000 years as a petty, racist, sexist psychopath? How insulting that it assumed, even relied on humans being able to sweep aside the first two thirds of their message in order to accept it.

[OutwiththeOutCrowd]

Edith, you introduced an interesting topic and I’ve been inspired to dig a little deeper and find a few statistics on the declared position of believers and non-believers on the death penalty issue here in the UK and in the USA. (I think the comparison between the two countries is illuminating.)

Some information on the opinions of religious/non-religious groups in the USA is available here:

www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/article.php%3Fdid%3D2249

Some related results for the UK are given here:

www.theosthinktank.co.uk/comment/2015/03/26/yes-to-the-death-penalty-think-most-anglicans-and-non-religious

In the USA, support for the death penalty runs at 71% amongst Protestants, 66% amongst Catholics and 57% amongst those with no religion. (Gallop Poll 2004 – sorry a bit out of date).

In the UK, over the period 2000 - 2012, Anglicans were consistently the most in favour of the death penalty at around 60 – 65%, Catholics the least at around 50 – 55% with the ‘no religion’ group falling somewhere in between.

It is only very recently that the populace as a whole has come out marginally against the death penalty at 48% support (as mentioned by Bolognese).

It has become socially acceptable not to identify as a Christian in the UK. No religion - or even atheism - has become the populist choice rather than being the preserve of the liberal elite as is still the case in the USA. I think this accounts for the switch in positions of the Catholics and the ‘no religion’ cohort in moving from the States data to the UK data.

In general, though, there is not much difference amongst the Anglicans, Catholics and ‘no religion’ group in the UK when it comes to attitude towards the death penalty.

Looking at the evolution of opinion on the death penalty in the UK as a function of time over a longer period, it is evident that support is gradually ebbing away.

speakingofresearch.files.wordpress.com/2016/01/uk-death-penalty-support.jpg

(Hooray!)

Over the same time period as the decrease in support for the death penalty, there has been a shift in the UK towards a more secular society, so the decrease can’t be due to people deciding to pay more attention to the Sermon on the Mount. The reason for the decline in support must be sought elsewhere.

Personally, I think it comes down at least in part to imaginative empathy. The ability and inclination of the community at large to put themselves in the shoes of the poor, the marginalised and the dispossessed is surely key, for these are the people who are most at risk of finding themselves on trial for the most heinous of crimes.

Life in the UK is stable compared to other parts of the world and indeed to life in the UK in earlier times. People, for the most part, aren’t struggling merely to survive and in an environment that is less harsh, it is easier to cultivate attitudes that are less harsh. People are better informed now too about difficulties in the lives of others and about the potential for miscarriages of justice – or at least the information is more readily available. All this leads to a more enlightened and compassionate society that is less inclined to endorse capital punishment.

[capsium]

capsium (without raising this to a professional level) I minimise confirmation bias by refusing to accept any claims without verifiable proof. I dont have any beliefs about the world that dont have verifiable proof.

Bolognese

So what makes you disregard the evidence of Christians who do not support the death penalty, in compatability with their faith, with regards to the OP's question.

How do you deal with your bias?

I accept it.

[capsium]

Sorbet I cannot answer unanswerable questions, intellectually or otherwise, can I? And I am not running away when I respond by continuing to post. All I can do is talk about my beliefs - which you do not appear to be much satisfied with.

As you were.

[capsium]

^Sorbet ah, sorry, I see how I expressed myself badly - no moral absolutes in this timeframe. Hmm there is a real difficulty expressing what I mean.

God had to come as Jesus to be in this linear time frame or otherwise communicate with ordinary people (as well as they could receive Him) - Jesus shows what God (absolutely moral) looks like within a linear time frame.

[ApricotSorbet99]

You didn't define Christianity, did you!

Perhaps you mean beliefs rather than religion.

Of course you've defined your own beliefs....but they are launched from "facts" that you had no part in gathering.

The facts don't belong to you so you have no right to ask anyone not to discuss or refute them.

As someone once memorably put it....you are entitled to your own beliefs but you are not entitled to your own facts.

And.....

God interacts with His people......etc. Ha!

Do you understand what you are doing? You are making excuses for God's apparent inaction and failure to respond to 99.99% of prayers by saying, "Well, basically he responds differently to different people based on their different needs and contexts".

Which, honestly, is a risibly transparent excuse.

And when have you experienced a non-linear timeframe? Presumably you must have done in order to decide how morals work within one!

There is no such thing as a moral absolute. Anyone who thinks there is simply does not understand morality. And shovelling the whole problem into a fictitious supernatural realm does not assist your argument one iota. It's nothing more than intellectual running away when you can't answer unanswerable questions.

[DaisyFranceLynch]

I say "conservative Republican beliefs" - have just looked up a recent poll by Gallup and apparently 61pc of US adults support the death penalty. I still think it's a cultural rather than religious thing though.

[DaisyFranceLynch]

My impression is that the support of US social conservatives for the death penalty isn't specifically a Christian thing - it's part of a package of conservative Republican beliefs, some of which are influenced by traditional Christianity (e.g. views on abortion and gay marriage) some of which aren't (e.g. views on gun control). I find it strange that people who describe themselves as "pro-life" can be in favour of the death penalty but perhaps it isn't so dissonant in the US where these stances have over time become accepted as part of the same platform?

[capsium]

Sorbet God interacts with His people within their unique individual circumstances, within the linear timeframe they inhabit which is why human beings cannot reliably predict God. So He is relevant.

Without a linear time frame, what is good (moral) is a quality rather than set of actions. God can exist in a linear time frame, as He did in Jesus and through (interacting with) people who believe in Him.

[capsium]

When I talk about self defining religion, it is in preference to having someone else define your religion for you (especially by someone who lies outside your religion). Yes, you have your own biases but who can possibly know the nature of your beliefs and faith, what goes on in your head, how you experience faith better than yourself?

Self definition, in terms of religious faith, is the best we have available, short of having divine powers to know those people on the most intimate level.

[ApricotSorbet99]

So. God (the moral absolute) has precisely no relevance within this universe which has a "linear timeframe"? 1 quite agree, God is useless.

And what's the point of a "moral absolute" - or even morals full stop - oitside of a linear timeframe? Any act is immoral because of it's consequences. A consequence FOLLOWS an action....and "follows" is a meaningless word without time.

Morality can only exist in a linear timeframe.

So, God (the moral absolute) obviously does not exist.

Yup.

[capsium]

Bolognese I believe God is the moral absolute, however, according to my understanding there can be no moral absolutes within a linear timeframe because every context is different. I am not someone who sees in absolutes although I understand we need to make generalisations and have rules / be subject to laws.

Regarding a unicorn, yes, you would have to be prepared, to some extent, to see it, otherwise your brain would not recognise it as a unicorn - or simply not process it as such. You would have to know what a unicorn is to recognise it. Not that I expect to encounter a unicorn in real life any time soon!

I don't have a full explanation of why the Bible account you quoted described God killing Herod.

[ApricotSorbet99]

*Self-define their religion"

Eh?

Are your beliefs grounded in fact or not?

Is God actually up there? Did he really send his son down to be murdered? Does he really listen to your prayers and occassionally rouse himself to answer them?

I don't think you understand what confirmation bias means at all.

Basically, it's counting the hits and ignoring the misses.

I pray to God for a sunny day on.....

Monday. It rains
Tuesday. It rains
Wednesday. It rains
Thursday. It's sunny.........YAY! God exists...he answered my prayer.

That's confirmation bias.

And if you're self-defining your religion (aka making it up as you go along) then you are, as a matter of fact, living your life as one big exercise in CB.