The Torah and Capital Punishment

[David Davidovich]

Given that capital punishment is not a goal, the goal would be for there to be no executions at all. Again, as was mentioned before you would have to have, here in the land of Israel, a Torah based government structure, from the top to the bottom, that all Israelis want, accept, and work towards. That is the first step in even having such a government.

Next, the criteria is so high that essentially, using modern terms, a person would have to be actively seeking to do treason against the nation. They would have to have been publically making it clear that they seek the utter destruction of the Israeli/Jewish people. Further, they would have to be at a level that they stand up in the court and state, "Yes, I did it and I am totally sane and rational. I understand what Hashem commanded and I understand what I did. I want to see all of my fellow Israelis destroyed, in this world or the next. I hate you all with all of my heart and soul. Take that fellow Israelis. ha ha ha ha."

I am being a bit dramatic but that is about what it would take to be executed based on the written Hebrew Torah and Israeli/Jewish Halakha.

Okay, thank you for that.

 

[Heyo]

Refworld | Capital punishment seems to indicate that even among signatories, there is a possibility of capital punishment.


Yes, and the moral position would be "if you have safeguards to make sure that ANY punishment fits the crime and is applied subject to a consistent and fair process, ending up with a death penalty in a few cases is acceptable."

I don't see that the only things considered "a position" are "always" and "never." "sometimes" is also a position.

"Sometimes" can be the result of contradicting positions, not a position in itself.

Any good (social) moral system also has, as a pillar, the good of the community and a pillar of that might be the refusal to make the society pay for the upkeep of someone who has done something which destroys the community. As to whether a mass murderer who is arrested is now "defenseless" or not, that is a silly question. Do you mean to say that a death penalty can work if it is exercised at the moment that the person poses an imminent threat, without judicial process? Why would you incarcerate someone who isn't currently robbing your house? He is now innocent. Punishments are consequences, not just reactions.

A society which doesn't have the resources to deal with criminals in a humane way fits the iron age, not today. The same goes for revenge as a justice motiv.

The process of something like stoning adds a layer of psychology -- the biblical requirement demands that the accuser be involved in the process. If anything, this would dissuade some people from testifying or pursuing the death penalty as the individual might NOT want to be involved. So the biblical requirement actually reduces the implementation of capital punishment.

And cruel punishment. You're not convincing me that you aren't frozen in bronze age thinking.

 

[rosends]

"Sometimes" can be the result of contradicting positions, not a position in itself.

Sometimes it can. And sometimes it can be a position in and of itself.

A society which doesn't have the resources to deal with criminals in a humane way fits the iron age, not today. The same goes for revenge as a justice motiv.

That is certainly one attitude to take. Of course it begs a definition of humane and the balancing of humane in a merciful sense to the individual and humane to the needs of the larger community.

And cruel punishment. You're not convincing me that you aren't frozen in bronze age thinking.

And you aren't convincing me that I am.

 

[Heyo]

And you aren't convincing me that I am.

All you did up to now is trying to defend bronze age views. What about the things that have changed? The moral development you went through?

 

[rosends]

All you did up to now is trying to defend bronze age views. What about the things that have changed? The moral development you went through?

No. I also showed that the use of capital punishment - even among signatories of a document you cited - exists so it isn't all about bronze age anything.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

A society which doesn't have the resources to deal with criminals in a humane way fits the iron age, not today.

This brings me to an interesting point. If you don't mind me asking the following questions.

1. What country do you live in?
2. How are the following crimes dealt with in the soceity you come from?
   • Treason which causes the destruction of more than 100 people?
   • Foreign terrorism?
   • Perputrators of mass shootings?
   • Terrorism on the soil of your country?
   • Mafia/gang violence?
   • Isis fighters who left your country to join a terrorist state?
   • Seriel killers?
   • Serial child abusers?
   • Colonizers of African and South American countries?

Also, in the country you come from who set/sets the standard for criminal punishment?

1. A national vote of citizens?
2. Elected officials?

 

[Heyo]

This brings me to an interesting point. If you don't mind me asking the following questions.

1. What country do you live in?

1. 
   I live in a country that has overcome old traditions and questionable morals. E.g. was it tradition to blame the Jews for any mishaps and persecute them. We don't do that any more.
   

   [*]How are the following crimes dealt with in the soceity you come from?
   

   • Treason which causes the destruction of more than 100 people?
   • Foreign terrorism?
   • Perputrators of mass shootings?
   • Terrorism on the soil of your country?
   • Mafia/gang violence?
   • Isis fighters who left your country to join a terrorist state?
   • Seriel killers?
   • Serial child abusers?
   • Colonizers of African and South American countries?

   • 
     None of those carry the death penalty.

Also, in the country you come from who set/sets the standard for criminal punishment?

1. A national vote of citizens?
2. Elected officials?

The basics were set by people who beat us in war. They thought we weren't fit to decide about life and death.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

1. I live in a country that has overcome old traditions and questionable morals.

Okay. So, what country would that be?

1. E.g. was it tradition to blame the Jews for any mishaps and persecute them. We don't do that any more.

I wasn't asking about your country's past treatment of Jews. I was asking about your country's current legal system.

None of those carry the death penalty.

I wasn't asking if those particular situations are death penalty offenses. I was asking, How they are dealt with in the soceity you come from?

The basics were set by people who beat us in war. They thought we weren't fit to decide about life and death.

This brings me to a few other questions:

1. So, you are saying that none of the citizens of your country had any say in your current legal system?
2. Are you saying that your legal system only exists, as it currently does, because another nation beat your nation in a war?
3. What are the names of the people/or nation that set the basics because they thought your nation wasn't fit to decide about life and death?
   • Were they right?

 

[Heyo]

Okay. So, what country would that be?

I wasn't asking about your country's past treatment of Jews. I was asking about your country's current legal system.

I wasn't asking if those particular situations are death penalty offenses. I was asking, How they are dealt with in the soceity you come from?

I was trying to keep my answers relevant to the the topic of the OP. If you can explain how your questions are relevant, I may give them another shot.

This brings me to a few other questions:

1. So, you are saying that none of the citizens of your country had any say in your current legal system?
2. Are you saying that your legal system only exists, as it currently does, because another nation beat your nation in a war?
3. What are the names of the people/or nation that set the basics because they thought your nation wasn't fit to decide about life and death?
   • Were they right?

Again, relevance?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I was trying to keep my answers relevant to the the topic of the OP. If you can explain how your questions are relevant, I may give them another shot.

Sure, it is connected to the idea of morality, discussed earlier as a part of the topic, and also the idea of what is actual Bronze Age thinking.

Again, relevance?

It is relevant to the following statements you made.

It somehow makes us morally obligated to prevent you from ever having a temple again.

A society which doesn't have the resources to deal with criminals in a humane way fits the iron age, not today. The same goes for revenge as a justice motiv. And cruel punishment. You're not convincing me that you aren't frozen in bronze age thinking.

I.e. how do we know the society you say you come from is actually moral in all that all people would agree with? This was something you brought up in the discussion with rosends. Also, it will determine if your definition of Bronse Age thinking, which you connected to rosends comments, isn't also applicable to the society you live in, which goes back to the who idea of who decides what morality is. Also, it will determine if certain Bronze Age ideas may be actually more moral than certain thinking found in the society you are saying aren't frozen in Bronze Age thinking. I.e. maybe your society, based on what you have already stated about it, is actually not that humane to begin with. Thus, a person when comparing the record of a Torath Mosheh society may see it instead as more humane, mor advanced, and more logical than what you consider to be humane.

Further there is the point I made in the comment.

Ehav4Ever's comment #19

That is the relevance. Is there some problem with the country you come from where it not open for discussion?

 

[Heyo]

I.e. how do we know the society you say you come from is actually moral in all that all people would agree with? This was something you brought up in the discussion with rosends. Also, it will determine if your definition of Bronse Age thinking, which you connected to rosends comments, isn't also applicable to the society you live in, which goes back to the who idea of who decides what morality is.

The society I live in or the ethics it promotes has little to do with my personal morality. And the ideals it has is somewhat different how much those ideals are shared among all inhabitants.
But I'll list some morals that have changed in my society over time:

• We have abandoned slavery (or "serfdom" as it was called).
• We recognize equal rights for women.
• We recognize religious freedom.
• We recognize the right to life.
• We recognize equality before the law.
• We recognize free speech.

All those and a host more of human rights have been added to our laws and our sense of morality. The majority would defend those rights (even so many of our representatives fear that we won't).

Also, it will determine if certain Bronze Age ideas may be actually more moral than certain thinking found in the society you are saying aren't frozen in Bronze Age thinking. I.e. maybe your society, based on what you have already stated about it, is actually not that humane to begin with. Thus, a person when comparing the record of a Torath Mosheh society may see it instead as more humane, mor advanced, and more logical than what you consider to be humane.

Even if a Torath Mosheh society were more humane than a modern, secular society (which is a value call and relative), the question remains how the morality has developed over time.
Your point seems to be that your bronze age morality was already perfect 2300 years ago and there is no need to change - confirming my point that you are stuck in the bronze age - but you like it.

That is the relevance. Is there some problem with the country you come from where it not open for discussion?

There are a lot of problems in the country and society I live in but I see the development towards a more free and moral society and my hope is that that trend will continue. And when I look around there are only a handful of countries which are more advanced than the one I live in. I'm not planning to emigrate.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The society I live in or the ethics it promotes has little to do with my personal morality.

Okay. So, it sounded earlier like you were saying that the society you live did not have or has moved past certain type of thinking. I am guessing by what you are saying now this is not the case.

Are you saying that what you was describing earlier was only a personal description of yourself or your immediate family?

And the ideals it has is somewhat different how much those ideals are shared among all inhabitants.
But I'll list some morals that have changed in my society over time:

• We have abandoned slavery (or "serfdom" as it was called).
• We recognize equal rights for women.
• We recognize religious freedom.
• We recognize the right to life.
• We recognize equality before the law.
• We recognize free speech.

All those and a host more of human rights have been added to our laws and our sense of morality. The majority would defend those rights (even so many of our representatives fear that we won't).

That still doesn't answer my earlier questions. I will refine it a bit so it is line with the OP.

1. Is there a system of law in your society?
2. in the country you come from who set/sets the standard for criminal punishment?
   • A national vote of citizens?
   • Elected officials?
   • Some other nation that once occupied your borders?
3. Are the following, on a national and local level, considered crimes and if so how are the following crimes dealt with in the soceity you come from?
   • Treason which causes the destruction of more than 100 people?
   • Foreign terrorism?
   • Perputrators of mass shootings?
   • Terrorism on the soil of your country?
   • Mafia/gang violence?
   • Isis fighters who left your country to join a terrorist state?
   • Seriel killers?
   • Serial child abusers?
   • Colonizers of African and South American countries?
4. What types of maximum sentences can be imposed in your country/society/etc. for those convicted of such crimes?

Even if a Torath Mosheh society were more humane than a modern, secular society (which is a value call and relative)

So, this is where the mistake starts. Torath Mosheh society is 100% modern for every generation. It always has been because the soceity never stopped functioning. We simply stopped functioning as a national system within the borders of the land of Israel due to several invasions.

Thus, it seems as if you are saying that ANYTHING in the world that doesn't meet your personal values isn't modern. (Secular and religion has nothing to do with it since the system of legality we are talking about is not religious.)

the question remains how the morality has developed over time.

I don't see how that is revelent. If a Bronze Age society has less crime, less incarceration, and only a handful of executions for the most extreme situations in over 3,000 years when compared to a society that claims it is "modern/secular" but has higher crime rates, more incarceration, and more than 100 executions within 300 years it doesn't matter how either society developed.

The society that claims it is modern and secular is living in a fantasy land if they are trying to claim they are more moral than said Bronze Age society, mentioned earlier. Again, that is subjective - which be both agree - and it could be that the society that said modern/secular society has simply decided to that they are fine with the elements of their society that someone else may see as immoral. It is fair for either side to make such a personal assessment.

Your point seems to be that your bronze age morality was already perfect 2300 years ago and there is no need to change - confirming my point that you are stuck in the bronze age - but you like it.

No, my point is that your use of the term "Bronze Age Morality" puts a higher burdon of proof on the society you live in, using the standards you set in place. I.e. you haven't proven that the society you live in meets any universal standard for what you are even claiming to be morality. You are only claiming something w/o any evidence that your society meets a standard that someone else would agree on, or even the one you are claiming.

It makes we wonder why you aren't willing to say what country you live in. Maybe your soceity has some aspects of it that can be declared completely immoral, w/o bringing religion into the picture, in many parts of the world and throughout history.

Besides, for more than three thousand years Torath Mosheh Jewish society has been changing, advancing, and progressing. It is a requirement/mitzvah in the Torah for us Torath Mosheh Jews to change, advance, and progress in our own way. It is one of the reasons we survived having a nation, being invaded several different times, being dispersed several different times, survived attempted mass exterminations, etc. You may have missed the memo on that one.

There are a lot of problems in the country and society I live in but I see the development towards a more free and moral society and my hope is that that trend will continue. And when I look around there are only a handful of countries which are more advanced than the one I live in.

But that is not what I asked about. See above, I asked about some specific situations. Is there any reason that those questions can't be addressed?

Instead of using the world "problems", as you used, I would say that all societies have challenges that individual to their situation.

I'm not planning to emigrate.

How did you emigrating come into the picture? No one is suggesting that you move anywhere. If you were born wherever you were born then you should be there. You do realize that we Torath Mosheh Jews have no concept of telling the world how to develop themselves right? We are not missionaries.

 

[Heyo]

I don't see how that is revelent. If a Bronze Age society has less crime, less incarceration, and only a handful of executions for the most extreme situations in over 3,000 years when compared to a society that claims it is "modern/secular" but has higher crime rates, more incarceration, and more than 100 executions within 300 years it doesn't matter how either society developed.

Let's go back.
"Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?" was the original question posed by @David Davidovich in the OP.
@rosends answered that the lack of a temple doesn't permit you to perform capital punishment, implying you'd totally be stoning people to death if you had a temple.

That implication still lingers as neither you nor @rosends have confirmed or denied it.

So, in short, you haven't yet answered my question if your morals and/or laws have changed and if, how did they change?

Are you going to answer that or are you trying to deflect further?

 

[rosends]

Let's go back.
"Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?" was the original question posed by @David Davidovich in the OP.
@rosends answered that the lack of a temple doesn't permit you to perform capital punishment, implying you'd totally be stoning people to death if you had a temple.

That implication still lingers as neither you nor @rosends have confirmed or denied it.

So, in short, you haven't yet answered my question if your morals and/or laws have changed and if, how did they change?

Are you going to answer that or are you trying to deflect further?

Yes, we'd be "totally" stoning people at a rate lower than countries that now allow capital punishment kill their criminals.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Let's go back.
"Since Torath Mosheh Jews are so adherent to the Torah, do you still follow the edicts of capital punishment found in the Torah such as stoning, etc.?" was the original question posed by @David Davidovich in the OP.
@rosends answered that the lack of a temple doesn't permit you to perform capital punishment, implying you'd totally be stoning people to death if you had a temple.

rosends did not state that or imply that. That is what you are stating.

Again, be aware that Jews are not Christians. The way you think a Torah based government has historically ever worked is based on your exposure to Christianity. I can tell by your use of the statement, "stoning people to death" it shows me that you don't know what is and isn't an execution in Torath Mosheh.

Besides, I already provided you with details of how the legal system works and others have provided you how no Torath Mosheh Jews in history were ever looking to execute someone. In fact, I showed that the non-Jewish hitorical accounts back up the fact that executions wer EXTREMELY rare in the 3,000 years of Torath Mosheh Jewish society. Something even confirmed by David when he posted information that backed this claim up. What that means is that the system works and that anyone who knows Jews knows that we are not "frozen" in time.

Obviously, you have never read the Talmud nor the Hebrew Tanakh. Literally every page is discusing developements governance, legalality, law enforncemetn, society, medicine, science, morality, etc. I.e. these topics have been in the forefront of Torath Mosheh Jewish society for thousands of years.

That implication still lingers as neither you nor @rosends have confirmed or denied it.

Actually, I did respond on how the actual legal system worked/works and why executions are frowned upon and avoided as much as possible in the first place and thus have been extremely rare in thousands of years of Torath Mosheh Jewish culture.

So, in short, you haven't yet answered my question if your morals and/or laws have changed and if, how did they change?

I did actually answer your questions. I did it in several posts. I also addressed the fact that what you are "claiming" as moral most likely doesn't even exist in the place where you live nor is the society you are from most likely w/o elements of the legal system that can be challenged as being immoral.

Further, I have addressed the fact that you haven't defined, in any real detail, how your idea of a "moral" system works nor whether it is actually in practice in the society you live in this. Thus, you are simply saying something is immoral without proving that what you consider moral is actually moral, in a way that everyone would agree with it being moral. Besides, using the terms modern and secular don't make a place moral by anyone's standards. If that were the case everyone in the world would be in love with the Modern State of Israel. It is a secular nation and claimed to be immoral in various parts of the world. Some of these locations themselves have a very questionable history themselves.

Are you going to answer that or are you trying to deflect further?

Did it already.

HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE and HERE

Thus, I have very clearly defined Torath Mosheh morality and its the fact that its focus has never been on excution and the fact that Torath Mosheh Jews have a mitzvah in the Torah to advance and progress, in our own way. By like token more than likely your nation/society has decided what they consider to be moral or immoral in your own way, but I assume that some government officials where you live did that themselves and it wasn't all set by popular vote to the masses in your society.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Yes, we'd be "totally" stoning people at a rate lower than countries that now allow capital punishment kill their criminals.

I think part of the problem is that heyo seems to think that a) (סקילה) is picking up stones and throwing them, which it not and b) what (סקילה) "the" method of capital punishement. I get this impression from some of the wording they use which sounds like they are describing Chrianized thinking in this area.

 

[rosends]

I think part of the problem is that heyo seems to think that a) (סקילה) is picking up stones and throwing them, which it not and b) what (סקילה) "the" method of capital punishement. I get this impression from some of the wording they use which sounds like they are describing Chrianized thinking in this area.

While I agree, I also don't think it matters -- if the "Bronze age" thinking would result in fewer capital punishments then why is that bad?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

While I agree, I also don't think it matters -- if the "Bronze age" thinking would result in fewer capital punishments then why is that bad?

I agree with you, but we have to be specific because again I sense that the point in using "Bronze age" is not due to time frame but to make it seem if it is impossible for a society during the Bronze Age to have been moral. Of course we know that the reality is that really what is at issue is Western societies that "claim" to have a moral high ground w/o any evidence that they actually are moral or that they have a high ground. That is vs. non-Western societies which, in the mind of said Westerner, can't possibly have been/or can't be moral. Kind of like the mindset that most colonist societies had/have about the people and the locations they colonized.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

One thing I would like to bring up about this topic is that it is called Torah and Capital Punishment. One of the first problems is that in order to deal with either one has to have a very detailed defintion of what Torah (written and oral) is, what capital punishment is, what a capital crime is, and how the Torah defines capital crimes and the punishments for such for such crimes.

Further to this issue. One also has to determine what people/society was the Torah intended for, where, and under what circumstances. Of the what people is easy - Torath Mosheh Jews. The where is also easy - the land of Israel only. The circumstances are also easy a Torah based nation that all Israelis agree on having and 100% proof that the Creator of all things/Source of reality supports such a nation. I.e. according to the Hebrew written Torah the Torah is the model only for the Israeli/Jewish people.

That being said, If ALL these conditions are met then it means that the morality of such an Israeli Torah based nation comes from the Creator of all things/Source of reality. Thus, that is the standard such an Israeli Torah based nation has to meet.

Also, of importance - accordnig to Torath Mosheh a society that has the following circumstances is immoral and barbaric:

1. A nation that has a prison system where criminals are locked up with other criminals.
   • Torath Mosheh - Criminals need to be confined to areas among upstanding citizens who keep Torah and can defend themselvs so that the "criminal" can be hopefully influenced to change their ways.
2. A nation that locks away criminals for life among other criminals.
   • Torath Mosheh - Criminals need to be confined to areas among upstanding citizens who keep Torah and can defend themselvs so that the "criminal" can be hopefully influenced to change their ways. As the saying goes, if a Jew is sent into exile his rabbi must go into exile with him. Meaning that he has to be exiled to a place where he can be directly influenced by his surroundings.
3. A nation that allows cigerettes, with hazardous chemicals in them and addictive properties added, to be sold.
   • Torath Mosheh - A business that produces products that explicity do damage to the user cannot be allowed to operate in a Torah based society. Allowing such a product to be sold poses a danger to the public and also doesn't allow themselves to easily quit the bad habit.
4. A nation that allows foods that are not healthy, and cause the deteriation of health, to be legally sold.
   • Torath Mosheh - A business that produces products that explicity do damage to the user cannot be allowed to operate in a Torah based society. Allowing such a product to be sold poses a danger to the public.
5. A nation that causes polution and allows for the creation of materials that pollute the planet.
   • Torath Mosheh - Treatment of the land is a high level mitzvah. Causing destruction to the land of Israel and the planet, especially if it is irreversiable points to an immoral and barbaric society. Things such as the modern creation and dumping of plastics, chemicals, etc. into the land, rivers, and oceans are all types of immoral and barbaric activities in Torath Mosheh thinking.
6. A nation that creates and houses weapons of mass destruction.
   • Torath Mosheh - No generation should have to go to war. Yet, if there is a circumstance where it happens, normally speaks to a problem in that particular generation of Israelis, then a weapon of mass destruction cannot be employed. This is one the reasons that IF war is happening Torath Mosheh Jews are forbidden to attack from all sides. One side has to be left open for anyone who doesn't want to be involved. Further, the attack has to preceeded by two letters to invite the other side to avert the conflict through non milaristic means. A Torath Mosheh Jewish army has to be small in number, with a few exceptions of a draft, and there has to be proof from Hashem that such a battle is warrented.
7. A nation that has to execute anyone, even in self defense.
   • Torath Mosheh - that is right whenever a death penalty is invoked, it speaks to the lack of morality of that particular generation where the government had to enact the possibility - i.e. if they had to invoke the possibility then they were not keeping the Torah correctly in some way. In the Torath Mosheh perspective every generation that has injustice to the level where there is no choice but to execute someone is liable [i.e. that generation is liable for corrective action]. Thus, in the Torah there are functions that are given to correct such a fault in that generation. Further, the possiblity for the "government" of a Torath Mosheh nation to enact the judicial system to the maximum is one that every Torath Mosheh generation has not taken lightly thus, we are required to imitate the ways of Hashem, and work hard to convince Israelis, in such a nation, to come to the table of reason and reconcilation so that no generation has to lower itself to an immoral and barbaric level by taking such an action. i.e. all human deaths have an effect on society. Thus, the Torah uses language, in Hebrew, to describe things to make this point clear to Torath Mosheh Jews in order to convince Torath Mosheh Jews to cosntantly work on improving Israeli society so that crimes don't take place and no one has to be punished for crime.

Thus, this is the reason that in more than 3,000 years there have been only a handful of "Capital Punishments" in Torath Mosheh society. So, since I know that some consider the above to be "Bronze Age" thinking I am glad to be a Bronze Age man any day.

 

[Heyo]

Yes, we'd be "totally" stoning people at a rate lower than countries that now allow capital punishment kill their criminals.

Thank you.
Now, as that is out of the way, I'm ready to go on in the discussion.