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?

[niminypiminy]

"As far as I am aware most xtians believe Noah and the ark is a factual event."

Then I am afraid you know little of Christians or Christianity.

[Bolognese]

niminypiminy ok change that to I know for a fact that some xtians believe Noah was a factual event. e.g. It was taught to my DC as historical in their moderate Cof E Primary.

Given you don't believe in it logically shows that people believe in all sorts of different things. So how else do you define xtian except those who believe in the christ as described in the bible? Is there another christ?

[Lweji]

Christians should follow Christ's views on this and the ones that stick out are:

• those without sin should throw the first stone
  
• offer the other cheek
  
• love your enemies
  
• forgive 7x70
  

(or to that effect)

For Catholicism, killing another person is only allowed as self-defence or to save someone's life, IIRC.
As far as someone who committed a serious crime can be prevented from doing it again (by being in prison for example) then there is no reason to kill him/her.

[Bolognese]

Lweji - ok how do you know those 4 comments are anything to do with xtianity?

[Lweji]

how do you know those 4 comments are anything to do with xtianity?
How do I know?
Reading the new testament. They are all attributed to Christ.

[Bolognese]

Lweji - so you believe in the bible, but only half of it?

How do you decide what meaning to give the words that jesus apparently spoke?

[capsium]

BigD believing something does not have to involve complicated mental gymnastics. If concepts are difficult to grasp because there is much to know, it can just be accepted they are difficult to grasp because there is much to know.

I don't expect life to be simply grasped, it is intricately detailed, complex with many factors which interrelate and this is what I find fascinating. Tbh if something seems too simple and straightforward, I would think I had missed something. Understanding happens over time, I don't expect to get it by straining for it.

[Bolognese]

capsium - I think what BigD means (apologies if I am wrong) is that if you have an irrational belief in a supernatural creator then just say so, its fine.

The difficulty is when you conflict that with a claim of rational knowledge that you perform mental gymnastics to prove, you appear ridiculous.

[capsium]

Bolognese belief is not based solely on rationality because we can believe in something which is unexplainable. However what we believe does not have to be completely non rational either. The way I interpret what I read in the Bible makes sense to me. If you look at the thread I linked to up thread, you will see it mentions some particular Bible passages (Jesus' encounter with the Canaanite woman, for example). When I read what I said about my understanding of them it still makes sense to me. I come from a background of studying Literature, which included some very old texts, I am used to applying contextual interpretation, it cannot be ignored when interpreting and understanding narrative. So this type of analysis is not alien to me.

[capsium]

BigD everyone?

Go on then, meaning of life, tell me, seeing as it is so simple..

[capsium]

What do you want me to say BigD?

Is how a Divine being can be fully human and yet remain Divine, the thing you are puzzling over?

I was contemplating this myself. It struck me that Jesus must have just known things without having formally learnt them. In the presence of people who demand to know the 'source' of what you know and understand I would imagine this presenting a person with some problems, as it did Jesus.

[capsium]

BigD I don't know fully as to why I have Christian beliefs. I enjoy them a lot of the time, I like puzzling over the complexities and implications of what I believe. My faith affects me emotionally too, I feel in a positive way. I have not been persuaded to try and convince myself away from Christian belief.

[capsium]

I recently found the BBC series of The Monastery on YouTube, I found this very moving. You might be interested in it too BigD in terms of it illustrating how the Christian Faith can affect people.

[ApocalypseSlough]

BigD I'm like Caplsium.
I don't know why I believe but I enjoy my faith and I'm a better person for it.
I'd love everyone else to have the same sustenance from Jesus that I do but I don't think bludgeoning is the way to convert and I'm not 'bibled' enough to prove anything.

[Bolognese]

Jesus was half human half god, it was pretty much obligatory for everyone who was anyone to be a demigod 2000 years ago. 'Jesus' wasn't anything different/special from other celebrities/sport-stars of the day.

Does no one actually study history anymore?

capsium I agree belief does not have to be completely non rational but believing in the writings of unknown people decades/centuries after the event about a historical figure (who has not been proven to even have existed) taking about people who have not been proven to exist, is completely irrational. Then multiply that by translation errors, deliberate editing, and 'interpretation'. Anyone would have to be crazy or brainwashed to live their lives by that!

[Bolognese]

ApocalypseSlough - you are a better person in spite of it...

[DioneTheDiabolist]

Edith, having read your pps all I can say is this: while debating capital punishment and religosity is interesting, it will not further your and your DW's relationship. Indeed, it may damage it.

When y'all checked it out, it turned out that some religious people are for capital punishment and some are against it. If you look at atheist views on the topic, some atheists are in favour of capital punishment and some are against it.

What is important is that both you and your DW share the view that capital punishment is wrong. You have that in common. And that is good.

[Bolognese]

DioneTheDiabolist your right their, morality has nothing to do with religion.

[niminypiminy]

"Jesus was half human half god, it was pretty much obligatory for everyone who was anyone to be a demigod 2000 years ago. 'Jesus' wasn't anything different/special from other celebrities/sport-stars of the day.

Does no one actually study history anymore?"

Jesus was not a demi-god. That term means the rank of lesser deity (such as dryads and naiads) or offspring of deity and mortal (such as Hercules), and is mainly used in relation to the Graeco-Roman pantheon. Jesus Christ, on the other hand, was wholly human and wholly God - not one of a pantheon, but the second person of the one God, the creator of all things. That is entirely different.

In fact, early Christians were regarded as atheists because they did not believe in the gods of the Roman pantheon, particularly in the emperor-gods whose worship was compulsory in the Roman empire. Jesus was very different from the celebrities and sport stars of his day (though such terms are themselves completely historically inaccurate) in that he died a shameful, criminal's death. He could not have been further from a celebrity.

People who post in glass houses really shouldn't accuse other people of not studying history.

[capsium]

Jesus was half human half god, it was pretty much obligatory for everyone who was anyone to be a demigod 2000 years ago. 'Jesus' wasn't anything different/special from other celebrities/sport-stars of the day.

Bolognese Jesus was very different from your usual 'celebratory/sports-star' of the day, though. His status was pretty low by the societal standards of the time, He met a criminal's death. The account of his life, death and resurrection has travelled the globe and affected countless people's lives for over two thousand years.

Does no one actually study history anymore?

Yes and the further back you go, the more history is 'reconstructed' in order to interpret what evidence there is. This is nothing new. Does this mean we should totally dismiss what has been found? I don't think so, for me it simply means there is more to be found.

And as for being 'crazy' or 'brainwashed', I am not by any accepted standards. You don't have to be to hold Christian belief. As I study, meditate and reflect upon Jesus, what He said and did I can think about how this relates to my own life, revere Him, without needing a metaphorical 'CV' or 'references' to tell me who He is (not that there is no historical evidence out there to consider).

[capsium]

X post niminy.