Eorl wrote:Mindonfire,
Of course I don't know who he was. It's far from certain that he ever existed. However, his example remains in the words attributed to him.
Jesus Christ allegedly wrote (in Romans);
Quote:Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"says the Lord. "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
I think that pretty clearly sums up how Jesus would respond to the idea of the death penalty. Ghandi would do the same. To me, it's a good example.
Funny ain't it, hardcore atheist like me quoting scripture at you, mindonfire.
First of all Paul wrote Romans.
Secondly, in the verse that you have just quoted, it says to leave room for God's wrath. Now, who administers God's wrath? If Jesus has such an aversion to punishment, why would the paragraph speak about the wrath of God? Unless of course God's wrath entails allowing all convicted felons to go scot-free without any penalty. Or maybe hitting them with pillows and giving them candies.
Now, here is what Jesus said:
Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
Mark 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
That pretty much sums it up.
Bartikus wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindy..
"Is the allowing of law abiding citizens and their families to lose their lives because they do not have healthcare, while at the same time their taxes are providing healthcare for those felons who have chosen to murder, less barbaric than putting those criminals to death? "
What country are you from?
You like to ask questions but don't offer answers much do you?
I don't know where your from but, where I'm from....no person can be turned away with any potentially life threatening situation...just because of their inability to pay.
Not to mention that there are various free clinics available.
So, everyone has free healthcare were you live? That is wonderful. Are you in Canada?
Bartikus wrote:Mindonfire wrote:Eorl wrote:Let's not got there Bartikus. Let's just agree that Jesus would not have killed anyone and that his example is a good one.
Say's who? Who say's that Jesus would not have killed anyone? How do you know? Do you even know who Jesus is?
Even if Jesus would avenge or kill.....it is for him to do so. No?
Have you ever seen the responses of the Amish when one of their own are killed or murdered?
I'll give you a hint...they don't call for the death of the criminal.
And that is their choice. And that choice will lead to a certain result. If an antelope was able to succesfully retaliate against a lion each time the lion killed one of its own, do you know what would happen? Well, for beginners the lion would attack the antelope less. But since he can't, the lion will continue to increase his attack.
Mindonfire wrote:Eorl wrote:Mindonfire,
Of course I don't know who he was. It's far from certain that he ever existed. However, his example remains in the words attributed to him.
Jesus Christ allegedly wrote (in Romans);
Quote:Do not repay anyone evil for evil. Be careful to do what is right in the eyes of everybody. If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone. Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: "It is mine to avenge; I will repay,"says the Lord. "If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head." Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.
I think that pretty clearly sums up how Jesus would respond to the idea of the death penalty. Ghandi would do the same. To me, it's a good example.
Funny ain't it, hardcore atheist like me quoting scripture at you, mindonfire.
First of all Paul wrote Romans.
Secondly, in the verse that you have just quoted, it says to leave room for God's wrath. Now, who administers God's wrath? If Jesus has such an aversion to punishment, why would the paragraph speak about the wrath of God? Unless of course God's wrath entails allowing all convicted felons to go scot-free without any penalty. Or maybe hitting them with pillows and giving them candies.
Now, here is what Jesus said:
Matthew 5:30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast [it] from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not [that] thy whole body should be cast into hell.
Mark 9:43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
Mark 9:45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
That pretty much sums it up.
That pretty much sums you up.
Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindy..
"Is the allowing of law abiding citizens and their families to lose their lives because they do not have healthcare, while at the same time their taxes are providing healthcare for those felons who have chosen to murder, less barbaric than putting those criminals to death? "
What country are you from?
You like to ask questions but don't offer answers much do you?
I don't know where your from but, where I'm from....no person can be turned away with any potentially life threatening situation...just because of their inability to pay.
Not to mention that there are various free clinics available.
So, everyone has free healthcare were you live? That is wonderful. Are you in Canada?
No the U.S. The hospitals that do this are Catholic. It's not free but is made available to those who cannot pay. To distribute the money according to need is in line with the teachings of Christ.
Nevermind answering my question.
Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindonfire wrote:Eorl wrote:Let's not got there Bartikus. Let's just agree that Jesus would not have killed anyone and that his example is a good one.
Say's who? Who say's that Jesus would not have killed anyone? How do you know? Do you even know who Jesus is?
Even if Jesus would avenge or kill.....it is for him to do so. No?
Have you ever seen the responses of the Amish when one of their own are killed or murdered?
I'll give you a hint...they don't call for the death of the criminal.
And that is their choice. And that choice will lead to a certain result. If an antelope was able to succesfully retaliate against a lion each time the lion killed one of its own, do you know what would happen? Well, for beginners the lion would attack the antelope less. But since he can't, the lion will continue to increase his attack.
Many results can occur not just a certain result. What result could occur to outsiders who see the Amish do this? What result could occur to the family of the murderer? Amish are'nt afraid of Lions, Tigers, Bears, or Man. They are not Antelope. God knows the results...not you.
If attacks do increase then God help those who do.
These people offered love and forgiveness when given hatred and murder.
Sound like anyone you know?
Bartikus wrote:
Eorl...do you see how real he is now?
No. Jesus is dead, assuming he ever existed. His (or his followers) ideas persist, right or wrong.
Eorl wrote:Bartikus wrote:
Eorl...do you see how real he is now?
No. Jesus is dead, assuming he ever existed. His (or his followers) ideas persist, right or wrong.
Your not sure if the idea of forgiveness is right or wrong?
Who is dead?
Besides I asked if you could see how real he is...not whether he lives or is dead.
How real is he Eorl......"he is dead if he was real"! This is your response to the one you called my imaginary friend.
Is he imaginary because he is dead in your mind? If he was real and is no longer walking the earth....is he imaginary?
Just him or everyone who no longer lives? How can someone imaginary die when they never existed? How can we declare someone imaginary (George Washington) just because they are dead?
Is Ghandi imaginary?
You referred to a god, not to Jesus. I don't get them mixed up, whereas you are encouraged to.
I'm saying it's extremely unlikely any gods ever existed. That does not mean that everything Jesus is supposed to have said ..is wrong. On the contrary, it's mostly very humanitarian stuff, especially when viewed in context with the old testament.
Eorl wrote:You referred to a god, not to Jesus. I don't get them mixed up, whereas you are encouraged to.
I'm saying it's extremely unlikely any gods ever existed. That does not mean that everything Jesus is supposed to have said ..is wrong. On the contrary, it's mostly very humanitarian stuff, especially when viewed in context with the old testament.
God who is extremely unlikely to exist and Jesus who you don't believe exists....you don't get them mixed up? Why is that?
Eorl wrote:You referred to a god, not to Jesus. I don't get them mixed up, whereas you are encouraged to.
I'm saying it's extremely unlikely any gods ever existed. That does not mean that everything Jesus is supposed to have said ..is wrong. On the contrary, it's mostly very humanitarian stuff, especially when viewed in context with the old testament.
I referred to God as in the father and Jesus his son. I don't mix them up.
So God is imaginary and Jesus is'nt?
Yep. That's pretty much how I see it. Jesus may be also, but that's a whole other thread already.
The basic humanist philosophy definately exists, as it does in other cultures to a greater or lesser degree.
Do humanists believe that a person should love their enemies? Do humanists believe they should offer the other cheek?
Would humanists believe the reaction of the Amish as humanistic or something even beyond what a humanist would call for?
Would any humanist you know attend the funeral of the murderer who killed their children to offer condolences to the family?
Forget humanists.....have you heard of anyone doing such things?
I admit I have not.
It would depend on the individual human I suppose. I imagine humanists would have more in common with the Amish than with your average right-wing Christian fundamentalist.
For myself, I think the Amish reaction is highly commendable. I doubt I would have the ability to be so gracious if it was my daughter, but then I lack any kind of faith in an afterlife which may soften the blow for them.
Then you have never heard or known of anyone that would react the way the Amish did....right? Right wing...left wing....no wings....any religion....no religion.
If so who?
In that light...commendable is just a wee bit of an understatement since I know of many who do what can be considered commendable things both the religious or otherwise.
If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing. Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears. When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me. Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known. And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love. (1 Corinthians 13:1-13)
Bartikus wrote:Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindy..
"Is the allowing of law abiding citizens and their families to lose their lives because they do not have healthcare, while at the same time their taxes are providing healthcare for those felons who have chosen to murder, less barbaric than putting those criminals to death? "
What country are you from?
You like to ask questions but don't offer answers much do you?
I don't know where your from but, where I'm from....no person can be turned away with any potentially life threatening situation...just because of their inability to pay.
Not to mention that there are various free clinics available.
So, everyone has free healthcare were you live? That is wonderful. Are you in Canada?
No the U.S. The hospitals that do this are Catholic. It's not free but is made available to those who cannot pay. To distribute the money according to need is in line with the teachings of Christ.
Nevermind answering my question.
So everyone doesn't have free healthcare. If you do not live close to one of these hospitals, then you are out of luck. But the felon still has access to his healtcare and he doesn't have to live in the vicinity of any of these hospitals.
Bartikus wrote:
Many results can occur not just a certain result. What result could occur to outsiders who see the Amish do this? What result could occur to the family of the murderer? Amish are'nt afraid of Lions, Tigers, Bears, or Man. They are not Antelope. God knows the results...not you.
If attacks do increase then God help those who do.
These people offered love and forgiveness when given hatred and murder.
Sound like anyone you know?
Exactly, the results of such actions are known. That is why the Bible has two choices which are available to you. You can punish the criminals or you can forgive them and allow them to continue. Two choices which will lead to varying results.
Bartikus wrote:Do humanists believe that a person should love their enemies? Do humanists believe they should offer the other cheek?
Would humanists believe the reaction of the Amish as humanistic or something even beyond what a humanist would call for?
Would any humanist you know attend the funeral of the murderer who killed their children to offer condolences to the family?
Forget humanists.....have you heard of anyone doing such things?
I admit I have not.
Who says that punishment is the absence of LOVE? Who says that there is no LOVE in punishment? Does punishing your enemy for his crime mean that you do not love him?
Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:Bartikus wrote:Mindy..
"Is the allowing of law abiding citizens and their families to lose their lives because they do not have healthcare, while at the same time their taxes are providing healthcare for those felons who have chosen to murder, less barbaric than putting those criminals to death? "
What country are you from?
You like to ask questions but don't offer answers much do you?
I don't know where your from but, where I'm from....no person can be turned away with any potentially life threatening situation...just because of their inability to pay.
Not to mention that there are various free clinics available.
So, everyone has free healthcare were you live? That is wonderful. Are you in Canada?
No the U.S. The hospitals that do this are Catholic. It's not free but is made available to those who cannot pay. To distribute the money according to need is in line with the teachings of Christ.
Nevermind answering my question.
So everyone doesn't have free healthcare. If you do not live close to one of these hospitals, then you are out of luck. But the felon still has access to his healtcare and he doesn't have to live in the vicinity of any of these hospitals.
Actually by law no hospital can turn away any patient who faces a potentially life threatening situation. If you have no money or insurance and are bleeding profusely....please go to the nearest medical facility as quickly as possible. They will not turn you away.
They will bill you but, will not turn you away.
I spent over 30 days in a non-catholic hospital because of kidney failure. A
woman from a state or federal agency interviewed me a few days before I was to be released and because of my limited income and lack of insurance.....I never even received a bill. She told me I qualified for assistance.
Mindy...you are not suggesting that anyone in mortal danger who does not have insurance or enough money should not even bother approaching a hospital or clinic becasue they would be turned away. Is that your advice?
Do you know anything mindy about the 'healthcare' that most prisoners receive. Have you been to prison?
Mindonfire wrote:Bartikus wrote:
Many results can occur not just a certain result. What result could occur to outsiders who see the Amish do this? What result could occur to the family of the murderer? Amish are'nt afraid of Lions, Tigers, Bears, or Man. They are not Antelope. God knows the results...not you.
If attacks do increase then God help those who do.
These people offered love and forgiveness when given hatred and murder.
Sound like anyone you know?
Exactly, the results of such actions are known. That is why the Bible has two choices which are available to you. You can punish the criminals or you can forgive them and allow them to continue. Two choices which will lead to varying results.
Who said anything about criminals not receiving punishment?
