Can anyone name the best possible reason why a Catholic might vote for a governor who executed 230 people?
~ Lisa Graas via her Facebook page, September 7
[Photo via Huffington Post]
Violations will be deleted and you may be banned.
Threats will be immediately reported to authorities.
Following these rules will make everyone's experience visiting JillStanek.com better.
Our volunteer moderators make prudent judgment calls to provide an open forum to discuss these issues. They reserve the right to remove any comment for any reason. Jill's decisions on such moderations are final.
Go to gravatar.com to create your avatar.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
What’s the problem, traditional Catholic teaching supports the death penalty as a just punishment for certain crimes.
“Can anyone name the best possible reason why a Catholic might vote for a governor who executed 230 people?”
Because those executed took innocent human life and because capital punishment was God’s idea?
Lisa, Dennis Prager’s arguments for the death penalty totally reversed my thinking. Prager is religious Jew and has a lot of common sense.
Here is the column he wrote defending capital punishment for Townhall several years ago.
Thank you, Luana!!
“Thus says the Lord God… “Will you profane Me… killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live…?” -Ezekiel 13:18-19
“What’s the problem, traditional Catholic teaching supports the death penalty as a just punishment for certain crimes.”
First, there is no “traditional” Catholic teaching, there is just Catholic teaching. Second, that teaching would not support the use of the death penalty in Texas or any other state in this country.
The death penalty has taken innocent life. Starting in the 80s DNA evidence has been used to exonerate many people murdered by the death penalty. I don’t have enough confidence in the justice system to get it right 100% every time. If there is ever any chance an innocent person can be killed, it is wrong. You can’t be pro-life and pro-death penalty.
Catholic church does not support the death penalty. It states:
2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor
There is no way anyone in the US could argue that “the only possible way to effectively defending human lives” would be via the death penalty.
It’s true the Catechism doesn’t expressly forbid the death penalty. Continuing on where Jeanne left off above, it goes on to say, “Bloodless methods of deterrence and punishment are preferred as they better correspond to the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.”
A consistent pro-life ethic means that we still recognize in even the worst criminal a chance for redemption by God’s grace, and we still value the inherent human dignity in each soul.
I’m not suggesting this is always easy or even palatable. Those who commit heinous violence against children, for instance, are the ones I struggle with the most. Yet our feelings are not the barometer of justice. And vengeance is better left to God. He alone knows the whole truth.
Cause he wants to repeal Obamacare and defund Planned Parenthood. Objective#1 needs to be getting rid of Obama period.
A consistent pro-life ethic means that we still recognize in even the worst criminal a chance for redemption by God’s grace, and we still value the inherent human dignity in each soul.
I agree. I remember back in my PC days, someone asked me if I would perform an abortion if I were a doctor. I said no, and the person (a prolifer) asked me why. I couldn’t give a good reason. That really started me thinking about and reevaluating my position.
To all the pro-death penalty people out there — if you were a doctor or nurse, would you administer that lethal injection? Why or why not?
We do see from Jeanne’s quote from teh Catechism that the Catholic Church DOES have a traditional teaching, as it states “the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty.” In other words, there is no de fide teaching concerning whether or not a faithful Catholic must accept or not accept the death penalty as intrinsically disordered. Thus faithful Catholics may, taking into account the Catholic tradition and other Magesterial teachings, have differing opinions as to the validity of the death penalty.
I would also are that there are indeed, at least in theory, situations in the US where the only possible way to effectively defending human lives would be via the death penalty. Suppose you have a mob boss locked up who continues to call out hits from prison. Or suppose you have someone in prison who kills a guard and who we have reason to believe will continue to kill prison guards. I am not necessarily defending the use of the death penalty in this or other situations, but I am saying that it does not seem to be the mind of the Church to declare that there is no situation that would warrant the death penalty especially when teh Church leaves such a possibility open. I do not think we should declare things that the Church does not.
Very well stated Bobby.
I have a serious disdain for Rick Perry, but the answer to this question is that there are lots of reasons why a good Catholic would vote for Perry. I will sum them up:
1. Obama kills thousands, maybe millions of people with his vehement support of abortion and euthanasia- These are people with no recourse (no appeals, nothing). So while these Texas executions are horrible- I would vote for Perry in order to oust Obama and save thousands of lives that would be snuffed out from abortion and socialized medicine. In a pure numbers game, Perry would save countless lives while his successor, bound by Texas law, will still have to execute the condemned anyway. Not voting for Perry saves no one. Voting for Perry saves thousands.
2. Moving Perry from a place where he presides over executions to a place where he doesn’t have much authority over such matters is a good thing- perhaps clearing the way for a Texas governor who follows board recommendations for stays and clemency. The Texas governor has very little power in this regard for a reason, because the legislature didn’t want an anti-death penalty governor to overrule the will of the people by commuting sentences of every death row inmate. Keep in mind that governors preside over state law- they don’t make it. They are executives who carry out the state will- good or bad. So it’s not like Perry personally killed those people. He should have done more to stop it, true and has blood on his hands for those times when he could have shown mercy and chose not to, but this is not even comparable to the guilt of a politician that supports policies that dismember innocent babies, especially with the gusto that Obama has for killing the innocent.
Thus, as much as a I have a seething distaste for Perry for this very reason (and others), a vote for him in an Obama vs. Perry election would be a moral action that would save lives. Not voting for him would be an omission to help when you have the power to act. Voting for Obama would be gravely evil. Voting for Perry would be the most morally-good choice.
“Suppose you have a mob boss locked up who continues to call out hits from prison. Or suppose you have someone in prison who kills a guard and who we have reason to believe will continue to kill prison guards.”
We have supermax facilities precisely for people like this, such as the ADX Florence in Colorado, one of the most secure prisons in the world. There’s no such thing as a prisoner too dangerous to be allowed to live in the United States.
That’s true, Joan. We have facilities to keep dangerous people from doing more harm. There is rarely if ever a need to kill captured prisoners to protect society.
Why again is there a need to kill unborn children? It seems like since you have mercy for the guilty- it would be a logical step to show mercy for the innocent.
I am sure there can exist criminals who can get around the security of supermax facilities or that the ADX in Colorado can become full. But that isn’t really the point. The point is that the Magesterium does not have a de fide teaching on the morality of the death penalty as intrinsically disordered or not. I realize that that does not pertain to your interest in this question, Joan, but that is the point of view from which I which to address it. I’m really not interested in particular arguments as to whether or not the current state of the US does indeed have conditions which would or would not warrent teh death penalty.
Bobby, I can’t ignore that most cases of executions are violent cop-outs. It’s easier to kill someone than the moral alternative. Abortion, euthanasia and the death penalty are all society’s way of shirking their responsibility to humanity. That’s why I think pointing out that capital punishment is not “necessary” in most cases is a valid point. The Church doesn’t condemn it across the board because it’s not intrinsically evil and sometimes is needed.
I just wish people would admit that capital punishment is an expedient cop-out to be relieved of dealing with the worst of society.
Getting back to Perry, at the Reagan debate the other night, the creepy moment was when the audience broke into cheers and applause at the number of executions in Texas. We shouldn’t be applauding capital punishment. There’s legitimate debate about whether it’s ever permissible, but we oughta stop short of getting excited about it. Perry’s attitude about it was also creepy. He seems proud of his ranking as the most “executing” governor in the country. Eewww.
The death penalty may be appropriate in some countries, but the United States is technologically advanced enough that I do not believe it is ever justified. Abortion is worse than the death penalty, but I still would not feel comfortable voting for Perry based on the large numbers of executions. So I would probably just abstain if it came down to Perry v. Obama.
For those who say “Justice should be left up to God”. He instituted the death penalty. He gave it as law to His people the Isrealites. God uses government to enact justice. There is nothing wrong with that. Read the article linked to above. If you use the “innocent people will be killed” argument then what do you say about people like James Ealey who was mentioned in the article? He killed again because he was not executed.
Look, I understand the arguments against the death penalty. And I’m somewhere in the middle when it comes to this topic but I do not think it is inconsistent to be pro-life and yet pro-death penalty. Because life is so precious when an innocent life is taken shouldn’t there be retribution? Shouldn’t there be a price to pay for murder? Yes yes, God can forgive a murderer but we as a society are not God. Do we just forgive those who break the law? Do we forgive the thieves and let them go free? Do we forgive the rapists and let them go too? “Well yes sir, you raped and beat that woman but we are not God. We can’t judge you. Go and sin no more.” What nonsense!!!!! Do we forgive murderers and demand no JUST punishment for what they have taken?
When people try to argue against the death penalty spouting “God will judge” thats where you lose me because we are not God. We as a society must have JUST punishment for wrongdoing. Where is the justice for someone like James Ealey who murdered a pregnant woman, her two teen daughters and her 3 year old grandson? And then found his way back into society after years in prison and murdered another innocent woman? He took 6 lives and yet gets to keep his own? Thats justice? I think not.
Indeed, Jen, that cheers and applause at all teh executions is quite odd…
Adair,
By abstaining, you just let a pro-death vote of an Obama support go uncancelled. Your abstaining doesn’t do anything good for human life. It only serves to make you comfortable. I am uncomfortable voting for Perry, too, but I’d do it to save innocent lives from Obama. Weigh the consequences and decide if tge emotional cost of you of voting for someone who don’t like (for good reason) is worth the physical, emotional spiritual costs of others who would die if we don’t do what’s in our power to stop Obama. I don’t think any nausea surrounding our votes is nearly as bad as the slaughter of babies and when we don’t vote to avoid assaulting our emotions, we are saying that our being comfortable is more important than others being alive.
You can’t do nothing when it’s in your power to at least limit evil. This mindset that you only vote for candidates who are perfect unfortunately doesn’t give rise to better candidates- it only ensures the evil candidates remain in office.
P.S. This is also a false dichotomy because the people condemned those prisoners not Perry. Perry can’t execute people himself.
Sydney,
I don’t think it’s inconsistent either to be anti-abortion and pro-death penalty- but I do think adding evil (execution) to evil (murder) just results in more evil. There is no good in it at all. It’s unnecessary evil. Killing a murderer doesn’t negate the first crime- it makes new victims. Human justice is flawed. God’s justice is perfect. It terrifies me to take time away from a murderer, someone who (like all of us), needs to repent and be saved. Satan wins when we hand him a soul and the Lord’s heart breaks. Execution doesn’t bring the victims back but makes victims of the criminal’s mother, children and other loved ones. Retribution is always bad and the death penalty is clearly about vengeance. And since human life is so precious, we can’t risk executing the innocent (which we do). The ultimate question is, “With all the pain and suffering and risk (killing the innocent) involved in the planned slaughter of a human being- what is the good that comes from it that justifies all the evil?” Unless the death penalty is necessary to protect human life- I can see no good at all that comes from it.
Hmm — it looks like everyone here has made Perry the Republican nominee already!
I have serious reservations about him and the death penalty, and his lack of international experience. But even without the abortion issue, Obama is a failure as president. If the economy continues to tank, he will be up there (or down there) with Jimmy Carter.
Not at all- the question says “vote” and the only context in which we could vote is if he were the nominee. If he was, he’d be up against Obama. So no one is implying that he will be the nominee- We are answering the question. :)
Jacqueline, I hear ya. Like I said I am somewhere in the middle when it comes to death penalty. I just don’t know honestly. I see the merit in the arguments of both sides. But I guess I just don’t see execution as evil. God used execution. But He never used abortion.
first off Romans 13 says the government has a right to punish evil doers… I agree that many innocent people have probably been killed on death row so we need to make absolutely sure they are guilty before they are executed.
Is it better to vote for Obama? He out and out wants babies killed in the worst way… I say go for the lesser of the two evils. Fr. Frank Pavone gave a talk once on Catholic radio that those that don’t vote or vote for a 3 party unlikely to get elected are actually throwing away their votes and they should go for the lesser of two evils. Now we know that killing babies is wrong we cannot be absolutely sure about death row inmates…
pick the pro-life capital punishment guy…
Sydney- I was just like that, too for the longest time. And still to this day, while I now disagree with pro-capital punishment arguments, I can still respect them and see this as a good faith disagreement. I can’t ever see arguing to murder an innocent baby as a mere disagreement amongst well-intentioned people. I have no respect for pro-abortion arguments or those that make them.
It wasn’t the intellectual side that pushed me off the fence- it was when someone explained to me what happens to humans during an execution. In the electric chair, they have to plug up the condemned’s orifaces because the electric current causes them to ooze. I heard that and thought- this is not something a civilized society does to a human being no matter what that condemned individual may have done- meeting barbarism with barbarism is still barbaric. And then I thought of the mother of the condemned knowing what’s happening to her child and seeing the clock tick down to the minute they know the will lose their baby is an emotional injustice and trauma I can’t support. And then I learned that every execution involves many people (two people flipping a switch- one dummy, one real, many shooters in a firing squad, two people during injections- one giving the poison the other not)- so no one person can know for sure that they are the one that did the killing. It something is so bad that we can’t bear to know for sure if we did it- that knowing we did it would cause emotional trauma- maybe we shouldn’t do it??? We sterilize the needles used in a lethal injection! Why? Because, it’s against our human nature to hurt other humans, but instead to protect them so all these steps of strapping someone down and killing them – the very thought assaults my humanity and makes me ill. And stories of executing the mentally disabled who have no clue what’s going on- including one who was saving the dessert from his last meal for AFTER the execution- it is absolutely inhumane to me to continue this unnecessary practice.
So I have intellectual and spiritual reasons- but it was mostly emotion than pushed me off the fence firmly onto to the anti-death penalty side. After I heard about the cotton balls in the ears, nose and such of people in the electric chair, that was it for me.
Catechism: 2267 Assuming that the guilty party’s identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.
If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and are more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.
Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm – without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself – the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity “are very rare, if not practically non-existent.”
Y’all don’t know the whole story here. One of them was innocent.
http://redcardigan.blogspot.com/2011/08/dead-wrong-rick-perry-and-death-penalty.html
Also, it’s not a doctrinal question. It’s a political question. Can Catholics vote for someone who supports the death penalty? ABSOLUTELY! Will more than 50% of Catholics vote for someone who killed more than 230 people with the death penalty? Nope.
It’s a political question, not a doctrinal question. Also, on the matter of doctrine, the Church has never supported the death penalty for the innocent. Read the link.
Indeed, Jen, that cheers and applause at all teh executions is quite odd…
What changed my feelings on executions was the televised reactions I saw to serial killer Ted Bundy’s execution. I understand that one is pleased when you believe justice has been satisfied, but to hold up signs applauding his death and to cheer and dance after his death?? – nauseating and stomach turning for me.
However, I would have zero problem voting for someone who has fulfilled the law by carrying out an execution sentence handed down by a judge from a court of law.
joan said: There’s no such thing as a prisoner too dangerous to be allowed to live in the United States unless that person is imprisoned within the womb and the mother wants an abortion.
There – fixed that for you joan.
Awesome, Chris. Powerful.
Chris A !!! you typed the words right off my keyboard!!!
Will more than 50% of Catholics vote for someone who killed more than 230 people with the death penalty? Nope.
Lisa, that is a stretch. I saw them vote against Catholic teaching and for the most pro-abort politician in history. And that was far more obviously against Catholic teaching then captal punishment. On what do you base your assertion?
Where was this question when Obama was running and the issue was abortion?
Where was this question when Obama was running and the issue was abortion?
Well said.
“What’s the problem, traditional Catholic teaching supports the death penalty as a just punishment for certain crimes.”
^ actually Catholic teaching only supports the death penalty in cases where society can’t keep the guilty person from harming society further.
Don’t believe me, but believe the US Conference of Catholic Bishops: http://old.usccb.org/deathpenalty/
The Catholic bishops in the United States have been calling for an end to the use of the death penalty for more than twenty-five years.
No- Lisa. I do know the whole story. Cameron Todd Willingham was innocent. Several were mentally retarded. Another wasn’t even the murderer- the murderer pled out to testify against the condemned and got a life sentence while the accomplice got death. The Board of Pardons and Paroles asked Perry to have mercy, and he still said no.
I stand by what I said. These details are irrelevant.
“I still would not feel comfortable voting for Perry based on the large numbers of executions.”
Texas governors cannot stop executions. It is outside their authority.
You are right, Hippie. But he doesn’t exercise options he has. He doesn’t grant stays to look at exonerating evidence. He ignores the pardon and parole board recommendations. He sabotaged the investigation into the Willingham situation.
He still has guilt in this.
link?
Anyway, 36 states and the Federal government authorize the death penalty. It sure does appear to have broad support. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_punishment_in_the_United_States
To my knowledge, Obama is not doing what he can to stop executions in the federal system and has said openly of some specific individuals that he expects them to be convicted and executed by the federal government. So, there is Obama who is pro abortion and pro death penalty. And there is Perry that is against abortion and fine with the death penalty.
So, the choice for pro life folks in a contest between the two seems to lean toward anyone who is at least against one of them rather than Obama who supports both.
Yea I have said for a very long time that the idea of life being sacred is easily combated with the obvious reality of life around us at any given moment.
Life is sacred unless you break a law written by other men…
Life is sacred unless it threatens your life…
Life is sacred unless you are hungry and want a cheese burger…
Life is sacred unless it feeds on the wood under your house…
Life is sacred unless it is dandy lions growing in your over groomed yard…
To put a very fine point on it just think about this… Mouse traps are legal and accepted in most households, but if I strangled a German Sheppard to death with a metal pipe I would be sent to jail…
So a dogs life is more sacred than that of mice… For something to be truly sacred it is a all or nothing proposition.
Life is sacred or it is not, there is no middle ground so…
Life is not sacred, we are just afraid of death.
“Where was this question when Obama was running and the issue was abortion?”
The question was everywhere, including right here on this site.
So a dogs life is more sacred than that of mice…
Huh Biggz? You don’t seem to grasp the meaning of the word sacred. Sacred life means more than just life that cannot legally be killed.
The big Catholic lie about the death penalty is this idea they promote that basically says prisons didn’t exist in the Old Testament when God gave the law to Moses in Exodus. So, that is why God commanded murderers, rapists, kidnappers be executed.
Of course, anyone with access to a Strong’s Concordance or an online bible search can search for the word PRISON and find that prison was mentioned as far back as the Book of Genesis in Chapter 39.
The claim by Catholics – in the catechism and by anti death penalty types – that God either did not know that prisons were a possibility for Israel to use as punishment or that God was unaware that prisons existed before He gave the Law to Moses is completely without merit. Its indefensible due to the evidence that prisons existed in the bible BEFORE God gave the Law to Moses in the Book of Exodus.
Biggz: You’ve obviously never heard of the Great Chain of Being. Google it. And don’t just quickly parse only one link.
By the way, since you’re merely asserting and not arguing, I could ape your style and just assert the contrary. It sure is easy to argue like Biggz! No work involved!
Jen: “And vengeance is better left to God.” But then that’s true of all penalties, not just the death penalty. Do you wish to apply that noble idea uniformly, or piecemeal? Or, perhaps, consider that justice and vengeance aren’t quite the same thing. See Paul in Romans 13, where the State “bears the sword.” What, to open envelopes? ;-)
Jacqueline: Not to my way of thinking. I’m agnostic on whether the death penalty SHOULD be in play, and the prospect of killing innocents is a serious issue. But I have no problem with it in principle. Forfeiture. Life is sacred and that’s precisely why death penalties are the ultimate respect for life. If that sounds weird you just haven’t studied up on forfeiture. And it doesn’t matter whether you approach it from a secular or a Christian perspective — it’s a coherent rationale for capital punishment.
Lisa: “Will more than 50% of Catholics vote for someone who killed more than 230 people with the death penalty? Nope.”
Will Catholics who are managers at some time promote workers who served on those juries? Yep!
The Texas governor doesn’t kill anyone.
Jaqueline: “And then I thought of the mother of the condemned knowing what’s happening to her child and seeing the clock tick down to the minute they know they will lose their baby is an emotional injustice and trauma I can’t support.”
Hmm. Does this mean you agree with me, and a scant few million other Christians, that there is no such thing as an ever-burning hell? Think of that mother knowing her son is suffering in hell forever.
Much worse, I think that idea is a gross insult of a God Who gave His only begotten Son so the world wouldn’t perish. Who looks for that one lost sheep.
As a protestant of Protestants, I don’t expect this to be an uncontrroversial opinion.
I support capital punishment for the same reason mentioned by previous commenters. Romans 13 leaves human laws to human government. After death, we will all face the Judgment. We won’t be sorting out justice very well until then.
Governments have laws to protect their citizenry. They are not perfect. A tiny fraction may not be guilty. Just wars will kill some innocents. But the alternative is anarchy. And daring not to set foot outside of our homes.
The most famous innocent person to be executed - I believe - was Richard Bruno Hauptmann. He was accused of kidnapping and killing the Lindbergh baby. He was the epitome of the stereotype of the stoic, off-putting German and Hitler was rising in Europe.
The major piece of evidence was the ladder used to climb to the nursery window. Scandinavian carpenters in the New York area scoffed at it. My grandmother said she and all the wives who brought lunches to their husbands knew Hauptmann couldn’t have built it, because even they had picked up enough knowledge to do better.
It did not have the rungs nailed between the struts. They were nailed on top of them by an absolute amateur, like a child would up to his tree fort. It couldn’t support much weight. And it didn’t. It broke, causing the baby to be dropped to his death.
Yes, we should protest unjust laws. And all we can do for now is choose the better of two candidates.
Of course, there was an even more famous innocent Person Who was executed almost 2000 years ago.
Hey Zeke,
Do you worship on the Catholic-ordained Sabbath? Do you celebrate Easter and Christmas? Be careful who you peg as having “wicked ways”. You may turn out to have that old “plank in the eye” condition.
truthseeker wrote: Lisa, that is a stretch. I saw them vote against Catholic teaching and for the most pro-abort politician in history.
I reply: You are suggesting that Catholics will always vote for a pro-abortion candidate. Considering that so many Catholics are leading in the pro-life movement, I’m not sure where you get that. Based on one election?
Catholics make up 27% of the electorate. No one can write off the Catholic vote and expect to win the presidency. Nine of the last ten presidents got 50% or more of the Catholic vote.
Catholics generally vote on two main issues: life issues and poverty. Catholics did not vote for John Kerry, though he is Catholic, primarily because he is pro-abortion. You have a short memory if you think Catholics will always vote pro-abortion, and for one to say the Catholic vote should be written off is like shooting one’s self in the foot considering they make up 27% of voters.
I would guess that every Catholic diocese in America has a prison ministry that opposes the death penalty.We have a culture that opposes the death penalty in the Catholic Church in America because we oppose the death penalty in this country.
There are certain circumstances where the death penalty is allowed, but those circumstances don’t exist here in America.
I wrote a reply to this post here: http://blog.lisagraas.com/2011/09/09/on-rick-perry-and-the-death-penalty-its-a-political-question-not-a-doctrinal-question/
Well then, Lisa, it would be good to get Perry out Texas where you have it that he’s responsible for all those executions, and into the White House where he won’t be responsible for any?
Catholics voting for Obama would be voting to keep an abortion man in the White House and a Death Penalty man in Texas.
Have it your way. ;-)
I’m fed up with this issue. Forget poverty. Abortion will kill someone quicker and more certainly than poverty. Forget the death penalty. Abortion will kill more TODAY than the death penalty has killed in a hundred years in this country. If enough Catholics voted for Obama to get him elected with a record of endorsing the killing of innocents like his, Catholocism is a joke and I will never go back.
Lisa,
The 27% Catholic is a very diltued 27%. For example it would include my eight sisters who were baotized and raised Catholic but play the personally against abortion but they support the pro-choice platform. I wish it were not so but a lions portion of the ‘adults’ who make up that 27% don’t practice the Catholic faith by going to church on Sundays much less following the Catechism as a guide when they vote.
I am too busy to continue in this discussion but something addressed to me deserves and requires an answer, because it’s gravely dangerous:
Hmm. Does this mean you agree with me, and a scant few million other Christians, that there is no such thing as an ever-burning hell? Think of that mother knowing her son is suffering in hell forever.
ABSOLUTELY NOT. Indeed, there is a Hell and it is literal and absolutely no intellectually-honest interpretation of the Bible can refute this. There are good-faith disagreements on Scripture meanings and this is NOT one of them. It is a self-serving lie of people who don’t like the truth when it’s unpleasant or uncomfortable. I wish no one ever went to Hell- but they do. One way to usher more people to Hell is to deny that Hell exists and that there is eternal consequence. So your choosing to believe what you want for a little emotional, psychological comfort actually results in eternal suffering in something so horrible you choose not to believe it exists. Not a good trade off- very foolish and downright scary.
How any Bible-believing person can be against the death penalty is beyond me logically. You can hold a belief in the Bible and a disbelief belief in the death penalty, but not if you are logically consistant. God, way back in Genesis told every single living person on the planet (not just the Jews later with the Law) that if a man kills another man by man will his blood be shed. This was repeated to the Jews in the Law, and affirmed again to Christians in the New Testament (for example in the Roman’s verse other’s have already noted). God is for the death penalty, at the very least for murderers, how can anyone claiming to follow God be against it?
Does the death penalty occassionally (very, very occassionally) catch innocents? Yes, of course, so does every other form of punishment or even praise. The Bible says 3 witnesses are needed to decide a murder case, and I know Christians who take various stances on what physical evidence or survailence evidence should amount to given that, but regardless of that the Bible’s (and God’s) stance on the death penalty don’t have anything to do with (in)ability to contain the murderer, rehabilitate the murderer, or verify that 100% of people exicuted are truly guilty, they need only be LEGALLY guilty.
Our ability or forgive wrongdoings on a person to person basis doesn’t have anything to do with it either. God forgives all sinners who repent, but even the most repentive sinner is still highly likely to face the consequences of those actions (the story of David and Bathsheba is a perfect example of this, so is Moses not being allowed to enter the Promised land). So saying that we shouldn’t execute because even the worst sinner can seek repentance is completely disengenious. They absolutely can, right up to the moment of death, it’s not our place to *artifically* extend that moment of death by ignoring God’s command to execute the condemned.
Ignoring just punishment does not foster justice, nor does it foster lawfulness.
God calls His followers to obey Him, not just the parts of His message they feel comfortable with.
A rightly convicted person (as in no lynchings by angry populous) should have a short period of time to get their affairs in order, then they should be shot in the head (one of the most humane ways to kill someone) or whatever other quick, sure-fire, and acceptably humane way the government dictates is allowable.
And yes, I would have not one heartbeat of guilt if I was in a situation to either lawfully execute a person or if I had to kill another human in self defense. (Terror, sadness, heartsick, sorrow, and half a dozen different emotions maybe, but no guilt or shame)
If enough Catholics voted for Obama to get him elected with a record of endorsing the killing of innocents like his, Catholocism is a joke and I will never go back.
x, don’t blame catholicism. The teachings of the faith are not a joke. They are righteous and a tremendous spiritual gift. Anybody can read the catholic catechism and choose to follow it and practice the faith. If you believe and practice what is in the catechism then you would not vote for Obama. So don’t confuse the catholic faith with a poll of ‘catholics’ who voted. Prior to the last election the Catholic Church came out openly and stated that a practicing catholic could not vote for Obama. Catholicism got it right.
Indeed, there is a Hell and it is literal and absolutely no intellectually honest interpretation of the Bible can refute this. There are good-faith disagreements on Scripture and this is NOT one of them.
Jacqueline,
Ah, but I DO disagree with that interpretation. And it is with good faith and respect for your viewpoint, I assure you.
I was raised in the Lutheran church, but have since been convinced that 95% of Christendom has strayed back to (or always been with) the traditions of men. I’m not prepared for an in-depth discussion of this broad topic, but this is what I’ve gleaned from “intellecturally honest interpretations of the Bible” from serious students of these things.
Only God possesses immortatlity. Not humans. Not even the angels. The Bible speaks of life, death, and ressurection. There is no blurring of these. Only God can and will imbue immortality on those He chooses.
Even Satan will not be burning forever in the Lake of Fire (Gehenna). It says – either in Ezekial or Isaiah – that he will be “ashes under their feet”. The wicked will be punished wiith “eternal fire” as it says in Revelation, but so were Sodom and Gommorah, and they are not still burning today.
When God says in John that He is not willing that any should perish, that’s what He means. Perish does not mean “live forever in torment”.
I believe God is a lot smarter than our puny legends would have it. He planned the universe much more intelligently than we would have. He created the angels as spirits, who could not die in and of themselves. He will have to “uncreate” a third of them because of their fall.
But as humans, we can die in and of ourselves. That is why our First Parents were banned from the Garden, lest they eat from the Tree of Life and become no longer “a little lower than” but equal to the angels.
As Dennis Miller says: “That’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.”
Catholic doctrine can teach you what is wrong and right but catholic’s are weak as any other sinners;maybe even more so because:
That servant who knew his master’s will but did not make preparations nor act in accord with his will shall be beaten severely; and the servant who was ignorant of his master’s will but acted in a way deserving of a severe beating shall be beaten only lightly. Much will be required of the person entrusted with much, and still more will be demanded of the person entrusted with more. Luke 12:47-48
The argument that innocents may be executed are not relavent today with DNA testing plus even those that have been proved innocent in the past few years were nearly always people with a previous criminal record so could not be called 100% innocent.
Dwain –
DNA is not available in many cases, and there are people on death row trying to introduce DNA testing to their closed cases before they are executed, who get denied. Look up The Innocence Project to hear some of the success stories but also to see some of the obstacles that need to be overcome just to get their cases reconsidered.
As for the fact that most people killed by the judicial system were guilty of SOMETHING, what a horrible thing to say to excuse wrongful executions! What, anyone who has committed a crime – any crime – well, they’re just on the trash heap anyway?
Hans Johnson
No, I do not “worship on the sabbath” like Catholics do. I don’t have a special sabbath day of the week since in the Body of Christ there is no more weekly sabbath to follow or to demand that others observe per Paul’s clear statement in Romans 14.
Ezek1319,
I understand Paul’s teachings that Jesus came to free us from the law. I still feel obliged to follow the commandments because Jesus himself taught us:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not one letter, not one stroke of a letter, will pass from the law until all is accomplished.” Matt5:17-18
Truthseeker:
You’re really confused. Jesus Christ taught the Jews, the circumcision, to follow ALL of the laws. All of them. Not just a few.
The Body of Christ is not under any of the law and is under no compulsion to keep the law. Having a sabbath day is not some kind of moral or criminal law. The confused Catholic Church likes to claim that people must worship on Sunday at a Catholic Church or they will go to Hell for not showing up (they call it a mortal sin).
In the Body of Christ, according to the doctrine and the gospel that Christ committed to Paul (“the gospel of the uncircumcision” Gal 2:7) for the Body to obey and follow, if you put yourself under any of the law then you are a debtor to the entire law and must keep all of it and are cursed. The Catholic Church is bringing a curse to those who claim to adhere to Catholic doctrine of law keeping.
Galatians 3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse; for it is written, “Cursed [is] everyone who does not continue in all things which are written in the book of the law, to do them.”
Rasqual – Wow the Great chain of Being sure sounds like a good deal for humans… I wonder how much different it would be if it were written by Lions…
Also this is a Christian concept and has no creditable scientific backing… kind of like the Bible.
However you make my point for me… The whole Idea of life being sacred was made up by humans who enjoyed living more than death. So as humans we get to pick and choose which life is sacred and which is not. Your great chain is a perfect example of how most humans think and it is thinking born out of arrogance and ego which may just come from believing that you are beloved by god. It is all arrogance…
Biggz, you are correct that most people hold the word sacred to be related to their belief in God. Is their anything more to it than that? Is anything sacred to you?
Ezek1319,
I was not referring to Jewish laws and customs; I was referring to God’s law as given to Moses. The ten commandments. Do you feel as though it is proprer for one to feel justified in breaking one of the ten commandments?
“The confused Catholic Church likes to claim that people must worship on Sunday at a Catholic Church or they will go to Hell for not showing up (they call it a mortal sin).”
Ezekiel, It has to do with following the third commandment. Keep holy the Sabbath. And the word MUST is misleading also; if you forget or if your car breaks down or if you are ill and miss mass then you are not sinning. And the Catholic Church does NOT teach that ‘people’ must worship at a Catholic Church. It only teaches that Catholics must worship at a Catholic church. And to Catholics attending mass is a privilege and a grace.
Paul thought it was fine to not keep the sabbath and not keep the 3rd commandment and that means a lot more coming from him since he got his doctrine and gospel directly from the risen Christ. Tell me if you think Paul is teaching a bad thing here in Romans 14 where he clearly says that no one needs to have holy days.
Romans 14:5-6 One person esteems [one] day above another; another esteems every day [alike.] Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes [it] to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe [it.] He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.
Also, you need to get over this fascination with obeying a law or not just because its included in “the 10 commandments”. In the very next chapter God commands executing children who curse father or mother (Ex 21:17) and Jesus Christ even upholds that law He gave Moses in Matthew 15:3-6 (also Mark 7). Catholics don’t even know that these verses exist and when they read them they either become atheists or just reject the bible as having any influence on their beliefs (if they did before then). Catholic = biblically illiterate.
Ezek1319 said:
Romans 14:5-6 One person esteems [one] day above another; another esteems every day [alike.] Let each be fully convinced in his own mind. 6 He who observes the day, observes [it] to the Lord; and he who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe [it.] He who eats, eats to the Lord, for he gives God thanks; and he who does not eat, to the Lord he does not eat, and gives God thanks.
What translation of the Bible is that from? It is quite a bit different than mine. Can you post for me with all of Romans 14? Anyway, here is some commentary I found about the meaning of Romans 14.
“Since Christ spells termination of the law, which included observance of specific days and festivals as well as dietary instruction, the jettisoning of long-practiced customs was traumatic for many Christians brought up under the Mosaic code. Although Paul acknowledges that in principle no food is a source of moral contamination, he recommends that the consciences of Christians who are scrupulous in this regard be respected by other Christians . On the other hand, those who have scruples are not to sit in judgment on those who know that the gospel has liberated them from such ordinances.”
The Sabbath commandment is the fourth one. No one has a problem with following the other nine. Only with the one that starts out with the word “Remember”.
“Also, you need to get over this fascination with obeying a law or not just because its included in “the 10 commandments”.
God wrote those 10 commandments with His own finger and he wrote them to govern the actions of all mankind. They can still be real useful as alarms to guide you when you stray from Gods’s will. It is the concept of a well formed conscience. Name me one of the ten commandments that you would feel fine breaking?
Did you ever read the catholic catchism teachings on the ten commandments. Check it out if you haven’t. A part of the teaching quotes Matthew 19: 16-20
“Now someone approached him and said, “Teacher, what good must I do to gain eternal life?”* He answered him, “Why do you ask me about the good? There is only One who is good.* If you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.” He asked him, “Which ones?” And Jesus replied, “ ‘You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery; you shall not steal; you shall not bear false witness; honor your father and your mother’; and ‘you shall love your neighbor as yourself.’” The young man said to him, “All of these I have observed. What do I still lack?” Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be perfect,* go, sell what you have and give to [the] poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”
Is it just me or does anybody else womder why our altars have steps and they are made of chiseled stone. I would prefer if all the altars were on hills and made from unchiseled stone.
Ezek1319,
You seem to be resorting to personal attacks which is a sign of insecurity in your reasoning. The Catholic Church has gone out of her way to put over 2000 years of their tarditions and beliefs out there in a catechism book for everybody to see and critique. And every one of the beliefs has corresponding scripture passages to back up the reasoning. So your comment “Catholic = biblically illiterate” is nonsense.
Zeke, how you doin,’ wildman?