Originally posted by SuzianneRJHinds has been open and vocal about his opinion on this issue, for years, right here, repeatedly. twohybrid's assumption was therefore bang on target. It's interesting that you admit to being all set to attack twohybrid even though you know RJHinds' views as well as I do.
Nowhere in what RJH said states or even implies twohybrid's assumption. He was, as I said, merely assuming in order to try to paint RJH in the worst possible light, and RJH allowed him to do just that.
1 edit
Originally posted by RJHindsYou appear to be avoiding the question and I can only guess why.I said in mine heart, God shall judge the righteous and the wicked: for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work.
(Ecclesiastes 3:17 KJV)
My own opinion is that the death penalty, for whatever crime, is legalised murder and lowers those who carry out the penalty (viz: all those involved) to the same level as the criminal (if, indeed, the condemned person is a criminal). The USA took a massive retrograde step by re-introducing the death penalty.
Consider this: Would Jesus pull the lever on the Gallows? Would Jesus electrocute someone? Please remember 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'.
You can make a distinction between cold blooded murder and the penalty of death for some hynous crimes committed by an individual that a given society has deemed worthy of death. The premise upon which the death penalty stands is that it actually puts a value on human life. It basic means if one maliously takes others lives (murders) then their life should be taken for their actions. It might seem barbaric at first glance but if one values their own life then they would not murder another's.
Manny
Originally posted by menace71Would you condone the public beheading of convicted cold blooded murders in principle?
You can make a distinction between cold blooded murder and the penalty of death for some hynous crimes committed by an individual that a given society has deemed worthy of death. The premise upon which the death penalty stands is that it actually puts a value on human life. It basic means if one maliously takes others lives (murders) then their life should ...[text shortened]... barbaric at first glance but if one values their own life then they would not murder another's.
Originally posted by menace71How can killing someone put a value on life? That makes no sense.
You can make a distinction between cold blooded murder and the penalty of death for some hynous crimes committed by an individual that a given society has deemed worthy of death. The premise upon which the death penalty stands is that it actually puts a value on human life. It basic means if one maliously takes others lives (murders) then their life should ...[text shortened]... t first glance but if one values their own life then they would not murder another's.
Manny
Originally posted by twohybridI believe serial killers like in the following list need to be caught and given the death penalty by the governments of men to safeguard society. Then God can deal with the second death, Lake of Fire and Brimstone issue.
You appear to be avoiding the question and I can only guess why.
My own opinion is that the death penalty, for whatever crime, is legalised murder and lowers those who carry out the penalty (viz: all those involved) to the same level as the criminal (if, indeed, the condemned person is a criminal). The USA took a massive retrograde step by re-introduci ...[text shortened]... uld Jesus electrocute someone? Please remember 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone'.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims
Originally posted by RJHindsFair enough but do you believe that homosexuals and adulterers should be put to death because it says so in the Bible?
I believe serial killers like in the following list need to be caught and given the death penalty by the governments of men to safeguard society. Then God can deal with the second death, Lake of Fire and Brimstone issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_serial_killers_by_number_of_victims
1 edit
Originally posted by twohybridNo, for those local laws or ordinances were for Israel at an earlier time and it seems clear that Christ superseded those with the new covenant. But that still does not mean that homosexual and adulterous acts are no longer sinful. They must be repented of and will be answerable to Christ as judge in the last day judgment.
Fair enough but do you believe that homosexuals and adulterers should be put to death because it says so in the Bible?
Originally posted by twohybridThe value is not in killing someone...... The value is in putting a price on life and if one murders another there is a price to pay..... The murderer pays with their own life. It should cause one to think first before murdering another and cause them to value their own life.
How can killing someone put a value on life? That makes no sense.
Manny