Capital Punishment and the Bible(particularly New Testament)

To my knowledge, Jesus never directly said anything about the death penalty. There is one incident that comes close and is used most often on both sides of the argument.

Jewish leaders brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. They wished to stone her as was the law. Jesus did not argue their right to stone her. He stated simply that whoever was without sin should throw the first one. Yet this incident can be somewhat misleading, since the leaders were trying to trap Jesus and expose Him as a fraud. So whether He was supporting or not supporting the death sentence is left somewhat up in the air.

You could point to His non-argument over their right to stone her as being a tacit acknowledgement of the right to issue a death sentence. But in His comment about throwing the first stone, you could argue that we should be at the very least, careful in using that ultimate punishment, if at all.

Personally, I don't think we should have a death sentence. Lock a person up for life and not let them have all the comforts of home would suit me just fine.

0 Replies

I am absolutely opposed to the death penalty. (Strangely, I am just as concerned about those who are responsible for the killing as I am about those who are killed, and that includes everyone from the jury to the janitor). The position of Jesus or the bible should not be relevant in any country where church and state are seperate.

0 Replies

CoastalRat wrote:

Personally, I don't think we should have a death sentence. Lock a person up for life and not let them have all the comforts of home would suit me just fine.

You consider lifelong torture morally preferable to murder? Interesting.

I go the other way personally. Then again death doesn't bother me as much as it seem to affect other people.

0 Replies

I am opposed to it for 2 reasons.

1. Sometimes innocent people are convicted and sentenced to death for crimes they did not commit and the true usually ends up coming out after they have already been executed.

2. Persons who are guilty of a crime bad enough to warrent the death penalty should spend the rest of their living days rotting behind bars. The death penalty would be an easy way out for these monsters.

0 Replies

Montana wrote:

Persons who are guilty of a crime bad enough to warrent the death penalty should spend the rest of their living days rotting behind bars. The death penalty would be an easy way out for these monsters.

Exactly. An easy way out, a kindness. Surely we can forgive them enough to rise above their level. Surely we can't judge them if we will descend to the same level as them in retribution.

After all, "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

Besides, jails are expensive. Such punishment is inefficient on a societal level. If you're really after suffering as well as death then I suppose you could hang, draw and quarter them. Not only does it cost much less but if you sell tickets it makes great entertainment for the whole family.

0 Replies

Actually, I've heard that the death penalty is much more expensive than keeping them in jail.

If someone killed someone I love, there would be no forgiving from me. I may not be without sin, but I would never kill anyone and if I did, I'd deserve to lose my freedom for the rest of my life.

0 Replies

Montana wrote:

Actually, I've heard that the death penalty is much more expensive than keeping them in jail.

A quick google search determines that quality bullets can be purchased for approximately a dollar each. With a skilled marksman I doubt much more than three shots would be required. A quality gun can be purchased for approximately $500, let's say it can fire ten thousand shots before it needs to be replaced. Let's say you need to employ an executioner and the total cost of training, wage and shipping him around is about $50,000 a year. At it's maximum point in America there were approx. 200 executions per year. Thus per execution the cost would be... $3 + $0.15 + $250 = $253.15

It costs $145-$183 per day to keep someone in prison. The average age at sentencing of death row inmates in is 29 years 236 days (let's say 30). The average lifespan is approximately 77.3 at the moment (let's say 77). Thus for the 47 years (17155 days) they would need to be locked up the total cost would figure out to be between $2,487,475 and $3,139,365

It's not my fault if the government isn't cost-effective in how it runs its death penalty.

Quote:

If someone killed someone I love, there would be no forgiving from me.

This is generally why the involvement of family and friends of the deceased is kept to an absolute minimum in the justice system when it comes to murder trials. They can hardly be expected to look at the matter objectively.

0 Replies

But then there's also the issue regarding innocent people being executed.

0 Replies

i'm always at odds on wich side to stand on.

Like Montana said there's the innocent executions on one side. That is the single biggest reason why to ban it. In my opinion Texas and their law system is a joke.

On the other side I get sick to my stomach when I think about having to pay taxes to support this scum for the rest of their lives. They should find ways to make jails self supporting.

I would think that lifelong torture would be justifyable to some of the scum that roams the earth. There are also some instnaces where taking the law into my own hands would be worth going to jail or gas chamber. People always talk about the prisoners rights, but what about the dead victims rights?

0 Replies

Why no cut the arm off a murderer, castrate a rapist..?...sure it's brutal, but nothing is more brutal than complete destruction.

0 Replies

Tenoch wrote:

On the other side I get sick to my stomach when I think about having to pay taxes to support this scum for the rest of their lives.

Yeah, I hate the idea of supporting politicians with my taxes... oh, that's not the scum you meant Wink

.

Quote:

They should find ways to make jails self supporting.

They have. It's called slavery. People in America seem to object mostly because of some war or other that they fought amongst themselves about how slavery was a bad idea.

Quote:

I would think that lifelong torture would be justifyable to some of the scum that roams the earth.

And yet if the risk of catching an innocent person makes a death penalty such a tragedy what does that make lifelong torture?

Quote:

There are also some instances where taking the law into my own hands would be worth going to jail or gas chamber.

That option continues to remain open to you. As always.

Quote:

what about the dead victims rights?

Tell you what, they're more than welcome to rise up out of the grave and kill their murderer without facing any jail time. We can call it post-humous self defence. How does that sound? Seriously though, they're dead. They're pretty far beyond caring.

0 Replies

Tenoch wrote:

i'm always at odds on wich side to stand on.

Like Montana said there's the innocent executions on one side. That is the single biggest reason why to ban it. In my opinion Texas and their law system is a joke.

On the other side I get sick to my stomach when I think about having to pay taxes to support this scum for the rest of their lives. They should find ways to make jails self supporting.

I would think that lifelong torture would be justifyable to some of the scum that roams the earth. There are also some instnaces where taking the law into my own hands would be worth going to jail or gas chamber. People always talk about the prisoners rights, but what about the dead victims rights?

I hear ya. I always thought that prisoners should have to work to pay for their room and board.

0 Replies

Quote:

I would think that lifelong torture would be justifyable to some of the scum that roams the earth.

And yet if the risk of catching an innocent person makes a death penalty such a tragedy what does that make lifelong torture?

same reson against the death penalty goes fo rthis too. I'm just saying that some people deserve torture in my opinion. Death would be to much of a light punishment. If the justice system was 100% then why not?

0 Replies

Re: thunder_runner32
Replies to what other people have said so far:

Eorl wrote:

The position of Jesus or the bible should not be relevant in any country where church and state are seperate.

That's a good point (legally, anyway). Biblical teachings, or the teachings of any religion, should not be a factor in deciding whether or not certain things are legal. However, this discussion pertains to what the Bible says about Capital Punishment.

theantibuddha wrote:

Besides, jails are expensive. Such punishment is inefficient on a societal level. If you're really after suffering as well as death then I suppose you could hang, draw and quarter them. Not only does it cost much less but if you sell tickets it makes great entertainment for the whole family.

Actually, it costs more to put somebody on Death Row then to put them in prison for life. This is the truth because we, the taxpayers, have to pay for all of the legal fees of all the appeals that they go through. Furthermore, people can spend up to 30 years on Death Row because our court system is incredibly backlogged.

And if you get your kicks by watching people getting executed... Well, there were public executions throughout history, I guess... Still...

theantibuddha wrote:

(facts and figures, etc.)

It's not my fault if the government isn't cost-effective in how it runs its death penalty.

While the death penalty is not considered Cruel and Unsual for any legal adult (recently declared Cruel and Unusual for juveniles; see here), the method of killing does have to abide by that Amendment. However, the method itself isn't what is costing a lot of money: It's the term spent on death row (up to 30 years) and all of the appeals that the guilty party makes the death penalty much more expensive than life in prison.

Tenoch wrote:

On the other side I get sick to my stomach when I think about having to pay taxes to support this scum for the rest of their lives. They should find ways to make jails self supporting.

Again, it costs us more to have somebody on Death Row than to have somebody in prison for life.

Eorl wrote:

Why no cut the arm off a murderer, castrate a rapist..?...sure it's brutal, but nothing is more brutal than complete destruction.

Some countries do that, and their crime rate is as low as 1%. That's a good thing, but they have a lot less rights than we do. In this case, the 8th Amendment would definitely be violated. I'm not saying that some people don't deserve those punishments. I'm saying that they are not allowed constitutionally.

My opinion on Capital Punishment:
I could never live knowing that I had taken another life, whether he/she deserved it or not. Personally, We do not have the right to take the life of others (neither us nor the government). The crime does not justify the punishment.
The current death penalty system does not work. It's costing the taxpayers way more money then it should, and is in no way a deterrent to crime. One of two things needs to happen:

1) Abolish it entirely (the one I would choose). Have the criminals spend the rest of their days in prison. Some may argue that they have 3 square meals a day, a place to live, and even cable television (in some cases.) I say that having your liberty taken away from you is a big-enough punishment.

2) Change the way it works so that it is more efficient, less expensive, and is a deterrent to crime. I don't know how many appeals a person gets, but I know that it takes years and years to go through them all, and they are always contesting the same thing: "I shouldn't have the death penalty because..." I say that you have one appeal, with one chance to argue why you don't deserve the death penalty. I also say that you only spend as much time on Death Row as you need in order for the appeal to take place. After that, you're done. The death penalty is applied swiftly. If it was applied quickly, it would be a deterrent to crime.

My views on Capital Punishment in relation to the Bible:
In the Old Testament, the Law was basically "An Eye for an Eye." If you took your neighbor's animals, he took yours. If you committed murder, you were stoned to death. However, in the New Testament, Jesus revoked the old laws, and gave us two main laws to follow. At school, thunder_runner32 made an intelligent statement: "Learn from the Old Testament, but live off of the New Testament." This is why I believe that Capital Punishment, from the Bible's point of view, is wrong. Jesus was all about compassion and love, not about pain and punishment.

0 Replies

Re: thunder_runner32
Hey there Agent kid, welcome to A2K.

00 Agent Kid wrote:

Actually, it costs more to put somebody on Death Row then to put them in prison for life. This is the truth because we, the taxpayers, have to pay for all of the legal fees of all the appeals that they go through.

Let's think this through for a moment.
A) If these appeals are necessary for justice should they not be required for all cases? Death penalty or otherwise?
B) If these appeals are not necessary for justice then shouldn't they be removed?

A logic-tree makes that a non-issue.

Quote:

Furthermore, people can spend up to 30 years on Death Row because our court system is incredibly backlogged.

Now, THAT is barbaric.

Surely death row trials could be put ahead in the queue of all others?

Quote:

And if you get your kicks by watching people getting executed... Well, there were public executions throughout history, I guess... Still...

I despise suffering of all kinds.

Smile

Actually I was playing to whomever I was talking to's idea of wanting the condemned to suffer attempting to highlight the barbaric nature of that notion of justice by comparison with a period of history in which such was done...

theantibuddha wrote:

(facts and figures, etc.)

Quote:
However, the method itself isn't what is costing a lot of money: It's the term spent on death row (up to 30 years) and all of the appeals that the guilty party makes the death penalty much more expensive than life in prison.

My above suggestions remove these two problems.

Quote:
I could never live knowing that I had taken another life, whether he/she deserved it or not.

Hypothetical question. What if they (regardless of deserving it or not), specifically requested it? They're in sound mental health but they ask you and you're the only one who can/will do it. Example: a friend of yours has a hideous wasting disease and asks you to kill them because they're in a lot of pain, have no chance of recovery and see no future ahead of them.

Quote:
Change the way it works so that it is more efficient, less expensive, and is a deterrent to crime. I don't know how many appeals a person gets, but I know that it takes years and years to go through them all, and they are always contesting the same thing: "I shouldn't have the death penalty because..." I say that you have one appeal, with one chance to argue why you don't deserve the death penalty. I also say that you only spend as much time on Death Row as you need in order for the appeal to take place. After that, you're done. The death penalty is applied swiftly. If it was applied quickly, it would be a deterrent to crime.

Sounds good to me.

Eorl wrote:
sure it's brutal, but nothing is more brutal than complete destruction.

I disagree. Everything is more brutal than complete destruction. Death is lighter than a feather, duty heavier than a mountain.

0 Replies

At last, antibuddha, something we can disagree about !!

Death, I agree, is of no consequence to the dead, after the fact, but that is a little besides the point.

For you to tell me that for my crime, I must forfeit everything that I am, that all my future potential to atone is nullified, that my life is something you feel you have a right to take from me, is brutal.

That my lineage over the many thousands, if not millions of years has reached this point and you can decide to stop it right here...is brutal.

That my potential to bring about the birth of who knows how many wonderful people into the world is cancelled completely is brutal.

That the incredible miracle of my thoughts and my existence here and now in this universe can be ended deliberatley by you, is brutal.

That my potential for positive impact on the rest of human history can be reduced to almost zero by you is brutal.

The impact on those who must perform the act of execution can be nothing short of brutal.

Ok, some-one make me stop writing now....

Oh, and conversly, I would help my friend to die if he chose to, although I'd be very annoyed at him for asking.

0 Replies

theantibuddha wrote:

Hey there Agent kid, welcome to A2K.
Let's think this through for a moment.
A) If these appeals are necessary for justice should they not be required for all cases? Death penalty or otherwise?
B) If these appeals are not necessary for justice then shouldn't they be removed?

A logic-tree makes that a non-issue.

A) They are indeed required. Anybody can appeal their case when they are tried and found guilty. People tend to argue more for their life as opposed to a jail sentence, though. People who are given a death sentence will contest the reasoning for that sentence again and again, even if they know that it's futile. Once they are dead, it doesn't matter what evidence is found. If the person is merely given a prison sentence, however, he/she need not appeal so many times, since they know it won't go anywhere, anyway. This is also true because if new evidence is found, then he/she would be in the clear, regardless of how many appeals he/she made.

B) Appeals are necessary because sometimes, albiet rarely, new evidence is found and can be presented during this appeal, either proving the guilty party innocent or simply reducing the guilty party's sentence.

theantibuddha wrote:

Now, THAT is barbaric.

Surely death row trials could be put ahead in the queue of all others?

You'd think so, but that isn't the case. No court case has more importance over the other, and must wait their turn. This is one of the reasons famous cases (currently the Michael Jackson case) seem to not start for months and months: because they don't. Sure, it'd be nice, but it doesn't look like it'll happen any time soon.

theantibuddha wrote:

I despise suffering of all kinds.

Actually I was playing to whomever I was talking to's idea of wanting the condemned to suffer attempting to highlight the barbaric nature of that notion of justice by comparison with a period of history in which such was done...

Sorry. Jumped to a conclusion on that one.

theantibuddha wrote:

Hypothetical question. What if they (regardless of deserving it or not), specifically requested it? They're in sound mental health but they ask you and you're the only one who can/will do it. Example: a friend of yours has a hideous wasting disease and asks you to kill them because they're in a lot of pain, have no chance of recovery and see no future ahead of them.

I'm taking is as a friend who's in a hospital bed, and I'm the one who has to decide whether or not to "pull the plug." I want to say that I would let my friend go if he/she was suffering constantly and had no quality of life. I'd like to say that, but I can't honestly answer this question unless I actually come across that scenario. I really hope that I don't.

theantibuddha wrote:

I disagree. Everything is more brutal than complete destruction. Death is lighter than a feather, duty heavier than a mountain.

I'm going to side with Eorl on this one: To some, death may be considered the easy way out, but I doubt a lot of people would choose death over something else (unless the alternative was really, really bad). It might not be terrible, but it sure isn't lighter than a feather, in my opinion.

0 Replies

Re: thunder_runner32

00 Agent Kid wrote:

[My views on Capital Punishment in relation to the Bible:
In the Old Testament, the Law was basically "An Eye for an Eye." If you took your neighbor's animals, he took yours. If you committed murder, you were stoned to death. However, in the New Testament, Jesus revoked the old laws, and gave us two main laws to follow. At school, thunder_runner32 made an intelligent statement: "Learn from the Old Testament, but live off of the New Testament." This is why I believe that Capital Punishment, from the Bible's point of view, is wrong. Jesus was all about compassion and love, not about pain and punishment.

Kid, Jesus did not revoke the laws of the OT. That was Paul, who never actually met Jesus and repudiated the OT laws for his own purposes.

Yes, Jesus preached compassion and forgiveness, but he never said a word against capital punishment for murderers. I suspect that virtually of the people on death row deserve to be there.

Given that innocent people die every day, whether at the hands of violent criminals or a merciless universe, the few that might be wrongfully executed must be weighed against the economic and societal cost of keeping thousands on death row. A swift and painless death is, IMO, more merciful than decades locked up in prison.

Let God sort 'em out.

0 Replies

Before anything else let me just say Eorl, you have a wonderful gift for poetry and turn for evocative phrase.

Eorl wrote:

At last, antibuddha, something we can disagree about !!

Finally... agreement gets so tiresome after a while.

Quote:

Death, I agree, is of no consequence to the dead, after the fact, but that is a little besides the point.

True, but it negates the pressing issue that would exist were death of consequence after the fact.

Ahem.

For you to tell me that I am chained to one place, never to see a new city, dwell within another culture or experience the natural beauty remaining to so few places upon this earth is brutal.

For you to place me with the violent in a culture where they would seek to do me harm, preventing me from an ability to retreat and preventing me from seeking the company of those few, rare, blessed individuals who have a chance of understanding me. That is brutal.

Or for you to tell me that for my crimes my very body will be altered, nay mutilated, in some way that can never be undone. To live an entire lifespan with my brain perceiving the absence of something it considers part of my very existence. My capacities impaired with those few precious years of peak performance stripped away from me.

Or to somehow modify my brain and personality in a way in which I have no hand? To be changed in such a manner is worse than death for something claiming to be me would live on in some twisted fashion degrading every memory of me that could possibly remain.

To me these things are the greatest horrors that can be imagined. Death is the final freedom, one that I would seek should all my other freedoms be taken from me.

I find it hard to care for justice, for none of these things are right. Not even death which I hold to be a light and small thing. Nor can I care for crime which inflicts equal horrors. Would that we could merely thwart someone in their purpose of inflicting suffering without this retributive force of discouragement.

I don't know.

Quote:

Oh, and conversly, I would help my friend to die if he chose to, although I'd be very annoyed at him for asking.

Why?

0 Replies

Capital Punishment and the Bible(particularly New Testament)

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know