The death penalty and Christianity - how does that work?

[waitasec]

I will assume that you didn't get up to my post that came after the one you are addressing, so I will repost what I said.

from my POV, i highly doubt that any of what is claimed to have happened to abraham actually happened i see it as a social commentary by way of folklore. which says people are figuring it out for themselves without the hand of this particular god.

But as I said above, not all other tribes had something like useful moral equivalency. Some did. Many didn't.

you will not find any society where it is allowed to steal kill and do harm to others of the same tribe for personal gain...the tribe will collapse on it self as anarchy would keep it from any type of progress.

Not every tribe out there had the benefit of Hammurabi.

nor this...
Urukagina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[McBell]

The death penalty no matter how one wants to spin it is about LEX TALONIS. It is about vengeance pure and simple. in the Christian tradition vengeance isn't a good thing, it is something best left to God.

So Christians are not to try and act like their God?

 

[Harmonious]

from my POV, i highly doubt that any of what is claimed to have happened to abraham actually happened i see it as a social commentary by way of folklore. which says people are figuring it out for themselves without the hand of this particular god.

That's your right.

However, unless you think the people who accepted the Torah were morons who couldn't think for themselves, there had to be a rhyme or a reason for these things to be mentioned.

YOU might consider what happened to Abraham as folklore. But you know... There is a point to learning about it. We don't actually learn law from Abraham. We learn from his example.

And if you pay attention to what he went through, there is a point to the story.

Even if you DON'T believe that Abraham had all of his dealings with God, what point would there be in saying and perpetuating that Abraham lied and told the Egyptians and the residents of Gerar that his wife was his sister, and the excuse that he gave was that he was afraid they would kill him so she would be available?

Unless you think that people who believe in the Torah are simply out to malign everyone who MIGHT have come in contact with Biblical characters (which you might - I don't know), the idea is that there might have been cause for Abraham to believe that he WAS in danger.

Another part of the story was that after the curse that God caused these kings for taking a righteous, married woman, they gave Abraham fantastic gifts of wealth.

Why would they do that?

Since you believe it is folklore, I would imagine that the point of the story is rather important.

The answer is that they acknowledged that Abraham was correct in his judgment against them. And by way of apologizing to Abraham and Sarah, they were given great gifts of wealth.

Do you honestly think that Jews (and Christians who also believe in the Jewish scriptures) are so egotistical that we would invent an immoral society so that we could tell a good story? And if so... What would be the point?

you will not find any society where it is allowed to steal kill and do harm to others of the same tribe for personal gain...

In this day and age.

the tribe will collapse on it self as anarchy would keep it from any type of progress.

I wouldn't say that there was anarchy, as much as an amorality/immorality that was kept under certain circumstances.

nor this...
Urukagina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Cool. I hadn't heard of this before. Thank you for sharing.

 

[Quiddity]

If a society is unable to contain or prevent further harm......the death penalty can be justified. Otherwise, it is to be avoided.

 

[Harmonious]

If a society is unable to contain or prevent further harm......the death penalty can be justified. Otherwise, it is to be avoided.

Nicely put.

 

[Quiddity]

Nicely put.

Personally, this is one of those areas, IMO, that you don't need to be religious to come to such a conclusion.

Seems pretty straight forward to me.

 

[waitasec]

That's your right.

However, unless you think the people who accepted the Torah were morons who couldn't think for themselves, there had to be a rhyme or a reason for these things to be mentioned.

that wasn't necessary.
:sad:

YOU might consider what happened to Abraham as folklore. But you know... There is a point to learning about it. We don't actually learn law from Abraham. We learn from his example.

it seems as though my right to hold that opinion doesn't sit well with you.

And if you pay attention to what he went through, there is a point to the story.

of ourse there is. i never said otherwise.
my contention is that god gets the credit when mankind did all the work.

Even if you DON'T believe that Abraham had all of his dealings with God, what point would there be in saying and perpetuating that Abraham lied and told the Egyptians and the residents of Gerar that his wife was his sister, and the excuse that he gave was that he was afraid they would kill him so she would be available?

Unless you think that people who believe in the Torah are simply out to malign everyone who MIGHT have come in contact with Biblical characters (which you might - I don't know), the idea is that there might have been cause for Abraham to believe that he WAS in danger.

:redcard:

abraham imo, is a fictitious character representing the beginnings of a tribe of people.
just like the tower of babel was a way to explain why there are different languages

Another part of the story was that after the curse that God caused these kings for taking a righteous, married woman, they gave Abraham fantastic gifts of wealth.

Why would they do that?

maybe it's a lesson about integrity.

Since you believe it is folklore, I would imagine that the point of the story is rather important.

The answer is that they acknowledged that Abraham was correct in his judgment against them. And by way of apologizing to Abraham and Sarah, they were given great gifts of wealth.

another lesson, stand by your convictions.

just because i believe it is folklore doesn't undermine it's message.

Do you honestly think that Jews (and Christians who also believe in the Jewish scriptures)

well if you consider their edited version to be just as meaningful.

are so egotistical that we would invent an immoral society so that we could tell a good story? And if so... What would be the point?
In this day and age.

to invent fiction/folklore to explain life lessons isn't egotistical

humans are not perfect and neither are religions...go figure.

I wouldn't say that there was anarchy, as much as an amorality/immorality that was kept under certain circumstances.

i'm saying any tribe that flourishes had a creed of some sort, that's all
and the god of abraham wasn't a part of it.

Cool. I hadn't heard of this before. Thank you for sharing.

no prob.

 

[Poisonshady313]

If a society is unable to contain or prevent further harm......the death penalty can be justified. Otherwise, it is to be avoided.

Exactly.


My position is that the US is unable to adequately contain or prevent further harm. Which is why I support the death penalty.

 

[Quiddity]

Exactly.


My position is that the US is unable to adequately contain or prevent further harm. Which is why I support the death penalty.

That argument can be made, but I don't find it particularly strong.

However, had I been Jewish or you Catholic, it's an area we can disagree on so long as we have the same starting point.

 

[Poisonshady313]

However, had I been Jewish or you Catholic, it's an area we can disagree on so long as we have the same starting point.

Could you elaborate on this? I'm not sure what you mean.

 

[Quiddity]

Could you elaborate on this? I'm not sure what you mean.

It's always been my understanding that holding certain positions or views have a certain amount of flexibility (depending on how complex) within Judaism (probably less so, the more Orthdox/Conservative you go?)...and as such the laymen is permitted to comtemplate and discuss such issues within certain parameters. It's the same for us within the RC.

In otherwords, you must agree with X statement (that a society must contain and prevent....), but......if the conditions change, the position may change. In the case of the death penalty the inability of the local government to contain and prevent will allow one to change your position to be ok with death penalty or not.

In your case, you feel that is the case now......I do not. Yet we agree that a government should contain and prevent....

 

[ankarali]

88% of expert criminologists believe that abolition of the death penalty would not have any effect on the rate of violent crime. SOURCE



it is a big liar, you don't see for exemple Iran, compare crimes numbers to another country