I agree totally with what you said. Humans by nature are fallible. The fact is we HAVE executed innocent people. And, that is reason enough for me to be against the death penalty 100%.

I belong to a group called Pacem in Terris Delaware and we had a guest speaker last month. It was a woman from Texas. Both she and her husband were convicted of murder 30 years ago and placed on death row. They were both eventually exonerated because they got a raw deal in court. They didn’t commit the murder. Unfortunately, her husband was put to death several years earlier.

I have the link if anyone’s interested. Per the rules, I’m not posting it here.

This is reason enough to not support the death penatly.

I guess I’m a hypocrite, though. I would certainly love to see bin Laden blown to smithereens. Not by lethal injection. Literally blown to smithereens with a pound of C4 explosives? Anyone up for that?

That said…I’m still see-sawing.

Sorry if I didn’t make this clear (or just never said), but I didn’t think that you were *denying* the Biblical codes, and I quite get that you are wondering if clemency is possible, or Biblically impossible.

As far as David goes, he didn’t directly kill Uriah, but I do recall the baby got it (a death for a death). Cain and Paul might be a better fit for what you’re asking about, though, although Cain predates the law, and I’ll get to Saul in a minute. Anyway…I don’t see it as necessary to rely on Numbers alone,(I hope we’re not talking past each other), but what I was getting at is that where you say that it doesn’t automatically carry over, I say it isn’t automatically rejected, unless, as in the case of circumcision you cite, there were NT passages that did away with that requirement. So while adultery isn’t a capital offense anymore, I saw no official sanction of saying that murder isn’t.

What is interesting about Paul (I agree that he’s complicated)is that he more or less said that Saul is dead, when he repented that part of him died and he’s not that man anymore, and not guilty anymore–that applies to his standing with God. Jesus made that possible. However, I don’t think Paul could have used that defense if some government authorities brought him up on charges of murder, that is, I don’t think he could rightfully protest, and I don’t think they would be guilty, if they did execute him. I hope I’m making sense. What I mean is, if that is the law, then they would have been wrong in God’s eyes not to carry it out (since that law would be congruent with His). That’s partly why I asked about forgiveness vs. punishment. Can they go together, or is it either/or?

I am aware of the woman who didn’t get stoned for adultery, but I think part of the reason she did not, was because her accusers were in on it (this is a suspicion, based mainly on the witness requirement and the character of the crowd in general. Makes me appreciate an impartial jury system. You don’t have to take my theory seriously, it’s just a suspicion I had).

You mention that what is a capital offense is not specified in the NT…If I haven’t totally misread you, then I can see where you might say that this lack of specification is a way out, if a government wished to no longer have cap. pun.?

Arrgh, I’m feeling dense today, forgive me if I read that way, too. I hate it when I ask a question and the person repeatedly gives non-sequiters and fails to answer, I’m sorry if I’m doing that to you. I may be late in replying in the next round, as I’m at work.

Jamie

Didn’t I say that I think capital punishment is Biblical? Well, let me repeat it here: I agree with your exegesis of Romans 13. The sword means the sword.

Rereading your post, I see that the remark I made about the Mosaic penal code doesn’t quite fit. I hadn’t noticed that you cite only passages that prescribe capital punishment for murder. But the larger point I made still stands.

In other words: in the new covenant, many things in the old covenant no longer remain in effect. For example, Christians don’t have to circumcise their children, etc.

Of course, the 10 commandments carry over. But we can’t automatically assume that all the legal penalties the O.T. prescribes for breaking them automatically carry over, unless the N.T. says otherwise. Part of the reason is that the N.T. recognizes the possibility of a political authority that’s not coincident with the Church. This distinction does not yet exist in the O.T., for obvious reasons.

This is why, when Paul talks about the civil authorities in Romans 13, the context is pretty different from the context of the passages you cite from Numbers.

Now, all Romans 13 does is give the state an unspecified mandate to punish capitally. It does not specify which crimes are capital crimes. And it doesn’t say that the state is obliged to enforce the entire Mosaic penal code to the letter. Thus, it doesn’t say anything about the state having to put to death a man who lies with a beast or who strikes his parents.

It seems, then, that Paul leaves a certain latitude to political authority. It’s within that latitude that I see occasional clemency as a possibility.

One example of a murderer being granted clemency in the O.T. is David, whom God not only forgives, but allows to continue living even after David had contrived Uriah’s death. Another example is Cain. Another example, although it’s a bit more complicated, is Paul. There are probably other examples. Note, too, that Jesus effectively grants clemency to the woman taken in adultery, even though the Mosaic penal code would mandate her stoning.

None of this means that the Bible says that the state can’t punish, or even punish capitally. It just means that you don’t prove your point by citing the passages from Numbers. More needs to be said.

Cordially,

Adrian

Is it just me or do the media reports of this story seem really aggressive in their frequent references to “Laci Peterson and her fetus”?

It seems to me that Laci’s child, her baby Conner, was clearly wanted, and was very likely viable outside the womb.

Isn’t there something inherently hypocritical in being supposedly “pro-choice” and yet choosing to use the clinical term “fetus” in the description of the tragic death of Laci’s very real CHOICE? My heart breaks for Laci’s family, and the loss of their daughter and grandson. Continuing to refer to him as a “fetus” and not the baby she obviously felt he was, strikes me as borderline hostile.

(end/rant) I really needed to get that off my chest.

The avenger of blood is avenger of blood shed: not someone who is related to you. Think about it, should the murder of an orphan go unavenged? If it’s your family who murders you (see Connor and Lacy), do they get off? Do I understand you right, or am I off track here?

Is there a special reason the state shouldn’t be executing its own people? It should execute foreigners, but let those among them who murder their own people go unpunished? It should execute no one, thus contradicting the law (if we’re still talking about Biblical requirements)I don’t follow you. For myself personally, if you are a criminal, you are no longer one of society, you’re one of the wolves preying on society, but I don’t want to get cute here.

As far as the “you” vs. “the state,” in America the people are the state. It’s a “for the, by the, of the people” deal. We are not excused from doing what’s right simply by hiding behind “the government.” We are the government, good or ill.

The soul of the executioner is not in any spiritual danger (if that’s what you’re getting at). How can there be, he’s doing what he’s supposed to be doing? I guess there could be an emotional problem if he thought he was wrong to be an executioner, but in that case, you have to wonder about a person who does that job but thinks it’s immoral–it doesn’t speak highly of their sanity.

Second, with respect to the penal code, Adrian I think it is clear in that Romans chapter I quoted that “the sword” is not “carried for nothing,” the state is the servant to carry out the wrath, etc. I’m literal-minded sometimes, so I think of a sword as a killing weapon (not being sarcastic) He didn’t say ” cloth-covered baton,” (for an example); Paul did have an unfortunate acquaintence with whips, yet he still chose a sword for that example.

Forgive me, but I have no recall of Jesus saying that the 10 commandments (Mosaic code) are null and void, so I fail to see how saying that this was a code from the time of Moses makes it null and void per se. I may be misunderstanding you here, it’s been a long day. At any rate, supposing that it isn’t Mosaic code in particular he’s endorsing, you are still left with the fact that capital punishment is endorsed and required, not condemned and told to put aside in favor of something else.

Anyway, as far as “may” versus “should,” the rest of Numbers (the chapter in the above post) answers that. While you say it doesn’t rule out clemency, I don’t see where it is permitted, either (in fact, it’s clear that not avenging the death is not permitted). The point is justice to the victim. I know that our justice system skews the other way, though. At any rate, I can’t think of any situations where murderers in the Bible, or the New Testament in particular, received clemency and furthermore had that clemency judged pleasing to God. If you can, then that would make things clearer to me about where you might be coming from with this.

Now I have a question of my own: on the subject of forgiveness, is there somewhere in the Bible where it says to forgive is to relieve a person of punishment due to him? Is it Biblically unlawful to punish a person *and* forgive him? It must be one or the other? I ask because of the priest sex abuse scandals (sorry to go OT), and it struck me that a key problem the Catholic church had was that it seemed to think if the priests were forgiven, they need not go to prison. That makes no sense at all to me, and as I said, I’ve never seen a Biblical support for it.

Anyway, this has been fun. Regards,

Jamie C.

Mark

Keep 5 Yards

Isn’t there something inherently hypocritical in being supposedly “pro-choice” and yet choosing to use the clinical term “fetus” in the description of the tragic death of Laci’s very real CHOICE? My heart breaks for Laci’s family, and the loss of their daughter and grandson. Continuing to refer to him as a “fetus” and not the baby she obviously felt he was, strikes me as borderline hostile.

I really needed to get that off my chest.

I’d like to make it clear that I am not trying to substitute human reasoning for God’s Word. And I’m not disputing that the Bible authorizes capital punishment.

That said, let me make two remarks about your post.

First, Paul doesn’t say in Romans 13 that the civil authorities are bound to enact the Mosaic penal code.

Second, I stand by my statement. The state MAY put to death. What do I mean by that? “May” doesn’t mean “can but shouldn’t.” It means “doesn’t always have to.” In other words: the state generally has the duty to put to death those who have committed capital crimes—but this does not automatically rule out clemency in this or that case.

Dear SCSI:

Got me.

Adrian

As for selective quoting of the Bible… using the same methods you could make Mein Kampf look like the Bilble and vice versa if you pick and choose verses without any context.