Death penalty and purpose of punishment

[Ender]

First of all I don’t think I hold the final opinion on anything. I just try to make cases using what Jesus taught as a priority. If you think that is an invalid way to discuss things you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine.

If you do not believe you are the final authority, who is? And don’t say “Jesus” when what you really mean is your understanding of his words. I take the position that the Church is the final authority and I am left trying to understand what she teaches based on what she has actually written. I don’t offer my interpretation of any verse in scripture: I cite the Church citing scripture.

So are we discussing the death penalty in the context of the OT God saying it was OK to kill women for adultery?

This makes no sense to me. We don’t have two Gods, the harsh God of the Old Testament and the peaceful Jesus of the New; they are one and the same.

Are we talking about the death penalty for heretics? Are we basing it on Lev or Matt?

I base my position on the verses the Church cites most prominently in the discussion of capital punishment: Gen 9:5-6 and Rom 13:1-4.

Are we looking at criminals as the least or less than the least? Are some of them in the guise of Jesus of the least when they receive their last meals or are they just scum that Jesus doesn’t love anyway?

I look at criminals as people who should be treated as moral agents, responsible for their actions and it is an affront to their dignity to assign to them less punishment than they deserve.

Ender

 

[frantony]

Since you and frantony have set yourselves up as having the final say on what the bible means and what Jesus taught it is not really possible to discuss this - or any - topic with either of you. All discussions begin and end with* “my understanding is correct and nothing else matters.” *We can no more make progress on this topic than we could on whether chocolate tastes better than vanilla. Arguing opinions is neither interesting nor useful.

Ender

*At least both of us have valid reasons for understanding the Bible and Jesus’teachings the way we do.
But for you, the only reason for saying something is true is only because the CCC and the Catholic Church teaches so. If the CCC teaches that the earth is flat, you have no right to question; if it says that the sun goes around the earth, you have to accept that also as “Holy” truth !!.

If what the Catholic Church says and does is exactly opposite of what Jesus Christ said and did (Jesus saved sinners from death, while the Catholic Church is trying to condemn sinners to death), who should true Christians follow? Jesus or the Catholic Church?

You are blinded by the power, and money and glittering clothes of the Roman Catholic clergy.
They are no different today from the clergy (Pharisees) of Jesus’ time. *

 

[Ender]

But for you, the only reason for saying something is true is only because the CCC and the Catholic Church teaches so.

I find it amusing that you accept scripture so faithfully while so totally rejecting the Church that created it. In any event, there is no room for debate here since there is no appeal to anything beyond your own opinion, which might be entertaining but is not likely to be productive.

Ender

 

[frantony]

I find it amusing that you accept scripture so faithfully while so totally rejecting the Church that created it. In any event, there is no room for debate here since there is no appeal to anything beyond your own opinion, which might be entertaining but is not likely to be productive.

Ender

*Even if it was the Church that created scripture (debatable), that will not be reason enough for anybody to blindly accept everything that the Church says. God has given brain, intelligence, conscience, and freedom of choice to people outside the church also.
The author of many parts of the Scripture is King David. That does not mean that everything that everything David did or said was correct or was the Truth.

As Christian’s we should treat The Church’s interpretation of the Christian Scriptures, like how Jesus treated the Pharisees’interpretation of the Jewish Scriptures. Just because they are clergy should not give them freedom to talk illogical non sense and expect others to accept their utterings as Holy Truth.

Jesus had warned often of false teachings in the end times, and that we should discern true teachings from false if we are to be saved. Blindly following anybody claiming to be infallible (even if he is a Pope) will be going against Jesus’ teachings. In the Holy Scripture (New Testament), it is recorded that Jesus Himself once called the First Pope (Peter) “Satan”. *

 

[Betterave]

• Blindly following anybody claiming to be infallible (even if he is a Pope) will be going against Jesus’ teachings. In the Holy Scripture (New Testament), it is recorded that Jesus Himself once called the First Pope (Peter) “Satan”. *

Mostly correct, except we *follow *Jesus’ teaching when we faithfully, not blindly, follow the leaders that he has put in authority over us. The faith that this faithful discipleship implies is a gift of grace and is very different from blindness.

In the NT it is recorded that Jesus said to the leaders he appointed, “If they hear you, they hear me.”

 

[KOM]

Pope John Paul II was right to condemn the death penalty. Our criminal justice system must never involve hating another human being to the point where we end up slaughtering him like an animal.

Regarding the primary purpose of punishment, any person who supports executions for murder, but who does not simultaneously support executions for women who murder their unborn children, is a hypocrite.

Jesus would never support the death penalty today, and we must ignore any modern day Pharisee who proclaims otherwise.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Pope John Paul II was right to condemn the death penalty. Our criminal justice system must never involve hating another human being to the point where we end up slaughtering him like an animal.

So it is okay for our justice system to hate another human being up to the point of locking him up for life? What gives you the authority to draw the line there? Anyway, executing someone does mean that you hate him; it shows that you regard him as a human being with free will and responsibility for his actions.

Regarding the primary purpose of punishment, any person who supports executions for murder, but who does not simultaneously support executions for women who murder their unborn children, is a hypocrite.

Paying a hitman to kill someone is not the same as doing it yourself.

Jesus would never support the death penalty today, and we must ignore any modern day Pharisee who proclaims otherwise.

Your comment sounds as if you are equating Catholics who support the death penalty (such as myself) with the Pharisees. If so, that is simply offensive. You certainly won’t make any converts with such an approach

Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus condemn the death penalty. Instead, Jesus affirms the use of the death penalty in John:10-11. "Pilate therefore said to him, “Do you refuse to speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?” Jesus answered him, “You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above;”

Notice what happens here. When Pilate reminds Jesus that he could execute Him, Jesus does not turn around and say, “You have no power to execute me.” Instead, Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a right given to the state by God.

 

[kelvinf]

So it is okay for our justice system to hate another human being up to the point of locking him up for life? What gives you the authority to draw the line there? Anyway, executing someone does mean that you hate him; it shows that you regard him as a human being with free will and responsibility for his actions.

Paying a hitman to kill someone is not the same as doing it yourself.

Your comment sounds as if you are equating Catholics who support the death penalty (such as myself) with the Pharisees. If so, that is simply offensive. You certainly won’t make any converts with such an approach

Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus condemn the death penalty. Instead, Jesus affirms the use of the death penalty in John:10-11. "Pilate therefore said to him, “Do you refuse to speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?” Jesus answered him, “You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above;”

Notice what happens here. When Pilate reminds Jesus that he could execute Him, Jesus does not turn around and say, “You have no power to execute me.” Instead, Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a right given to the state by God.

King Saul was chosen and anointed by Samuel at the LORD’s command. He was given the authority to govern God’s people.
1 Samuel 10:1 (NAB)

Samuel poured oil on Saul’s head; he also kissed him, saying: "The LORD anoints you commander over his heritage. You are to govern the LORD’S people Israel, and to save them from the grasp of their enemies round about.

…
1 Samuel 13:13-14 (NAB)

Samuel’s response was: “You have been foolish! Had you kept the command the LORD your God gave you, the LORD would now establish your kingship in Israel as lasting;
but as things are, your kingdom shall not endure. The LORD has sought out a man after his own heart and has appointed him commander of his people, because you broke the LORD’S command.”

What we can learn from the story of Saul is that, being anointed by the LORD or having the power to rule does not mean that everything done by the ruler is in line with God’s precepts. As we all know, rulers can do and undo but they will be held accountable for their actions.

Of course, Pilate had the authority to either crucify Jesus or to release him. For fear of the crowd, he chosed to sentence a just man to death.

Pilate sentencing a just man to death was a miscarriage of justice which is not in line with the teachings of our LORD.

So how can you really say that John 19:10-11 is an affirmation of the death penalty? Moreover that “Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a right given to the state by God.”
Jesus never said that.

 

[dudleysharp]

Pope John Paul II was right to condemn the death penalty. Our criminal justice system must never involve hating another human being to the point where we end up slaughtering him like an animal. . . . Jesus would never support the death penalty today

PJPII used his own personal opinion (prudential judgement) on the death penalty, basing its restrictions on the highly fallible and variable human prison system, which he wrongly evaluated, therefore putting innocents more at risk, shielding murderers from execution, with the unjust result of knowingly placing the lives of murderers over the lives of the innocent, more of whom will die based upon PJPII’s teaching, which offers less of a defense of society, as below.

“The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx

Pope John Paul II: Prudential Judgement and the death penalty
homicidesurvivors.com/2007/07/23/pope-john-paul-ii-his-death-penalty-errors.aspx

EXAMPLES

1. a) Anwar al Awlaki, a spiritual leader at two mosques where three 9/11 hijackers worshipped, a native-born U.S. citizen who left the United States in 2002, was arrested in 2006 with a small group of suspected al-Qaida militants in the capital San’a. He was released more than a year later after signing a pledge he will not break the law or leave the country. He is now missing and encourages violence against Americans from his website, Awlaki used his site to declare support for the Somali terrorist group, al-Shabaab and celebrated the acts of US Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, who murdered 13 and wounding 29 in a shooting spree. al Awlaki called upon other Muslim’s to duplicate those acts. “Radical imam praises alleged Fort Hood shooter”, Associated Press, 11/9/09, 6:19 pm ET news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091109/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_muslims

b) 16 al Quaeda Escape in Jailbreak in Iraq
theage.com.au/world/alqaeda-members-in-jailbreak-20090924-g4no.html

c) 23 escape from Yemen prison, 13 are al Quaeda
globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/massive_jailbreak_in_yemen.htm

d) Repeat sex offender,“cripple” serving life, overpowers guards, escapes
blog.taragana.com/law/2009/11/30/authorities-sex-offender-pulls-gun-on-texas-guards-during-prison-transfer-search-ongoing-17934/

e) Governor commutes 108 year sentence: Offender later murders 4 policemen, while on bond for two child rapes
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5if_tdQrE5B6tvgSYXBtfmfMOLEwwD9CACTHG0

f) Officials “embarrassed” by Texas death row inmate escape, Houston Chronicle, November 06, 2005 policeone.com/corrections/articles/120563-Officials-embarrassed-by-Texas-death-row-inmate-escape/

“. . . Thompson claimed he had an appointment with his lawyer and was taken to a meeting room. However, the visitor was not Thompson’s attorney.” “After the visitor left, Thompson removed his handcuffs and his bright orange prison jumpsuit and got out of a prisoner’s booth that should have been locked. He then left wearing a dark blue shirt, khaki pants and white tennis shoes, carrying a fake identification badge and claiming to work for the Texas Attorney General’s office.” “This was 100 percent human error; that’s the most frustrating thing about it.” “There were multiple failures.” Trial jurors and victim’s relatives were terrified.

g) the Holy See could find these types of cases every day seemingly forever, if it cared to look.

 

[kelvinf]

So it is okay for our justice system to hate another human being up to the point of locking him up for life? What gives you the authority to draw the line there? Anyway, executing someone does mean that you hate him; it shows that you regard him as a human being with free will and responsibility for his actions.

Paying a hitman to kill someone is not the same as doing it yourself.

Your comment sounds as if you are equating Catholics who support the death penalty (such as myself) with the Pharisees. If so, that is simply offensive. You certainly won’t make any converts with such an approach

Nowhere in Scripture does Jesus condemn the death penalty. Instead, Jesus affirms the use of the death penalty in John:10-11. "Pilate therefore said to him, “Do you refuse to speak to me? Do you not know that I have power to release you, and power to crucify you?” Jesus answered him, “You would have no power over me unless it had been given you from above;”

Notice what happens here. When Pilate reminds Jesus that he could execute Him, Jesus does not turn around and say, “You have no power to execute me.” Instead, Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a right given to the state by God.

Just to add; one could as well use Romans 13 to justify the death penalty and leaders who have committed all sorts of atrocities could/can very well use Romans 13 to justify their deeds.

 

[starshiptrooper]

Just to add; one could as well use Romans 13 to justify the death penalty and leaders who have committed all sorts of atrocities could/can very well use Romans 13 to justify their deeds.

Pope Innocent I was way ahead of you.

"It must be remembered that power was granted by God [to the magistrates], and to avenge crime by the sword was permitted. He who carries out this vengeance is God’s minister (Romans 13:1-4). Why should we condemn a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God’s authority.

(Innocent 1, Epist. 6, C. 3. 8, ad Exsuperium, Episcopum Tolosanum,
20 February 405, PL 20,495)

So how can you really say that John 19:10-11 is an affirmation of the death penalty? Moreover that “Jesus reminds Pilate that the use of the death penalty is a right given to the state by God.”
Jesus never said that.

Pilate reminds Jesus that he has the power to crucify Him. Jesus says that Pilate’s power was given to him from above. It is clear that Jesus was talking about Pilate’s power to crucify, as that is the only specific power mentioned in this exchange between Pilate and Jesus.

 

[pnewton]

Jesus would never support the death penalty today, and we must ignore any modern day Pharisee who proclaims otherwise.

Your comment sounds as if you are equating Catholics who support the death penalty (such as myself) with the Pharisees. If so, that is simply offensive. You certainly won’t make any converts with such an approach

KOM makes a common fallacy among Christians, namely, assuming to speak for Jesus by equating their opinion with the one that Jesus would hold if he walked the world today. WWJD may make for a good reflection, but when you ask the question of others, and then answer for Jesus, you do nothing but beg the question at hand.

Let us not forget that Jesus also condemned whole cities to death. He is meek and gentle, but He is not a “tame lion.” Let us not be quick to presume that we know the mind of God so well.

 

[frantony]

Pope John Paul II was right to condemn the death penalty. Our criminal justice system must never involve hating another human being to the point where we end up slaughtering him like an animal.

Regarding the primary purpose of punishment, any person who supports executions for murder, but who does not simultaneously support executions for women who murder their unborn children, is a hypocrite.

Jesus would never support the death penalty today, and we must ignore any modern day Pharisee who proclaims otherwise.

If Pope John Paul II condemned death Penalty, why didn’t he correct the erring clauses in CCC which are mis guiding Mr. Ender and probably many million other Catholics in the world?

 

[frantony]

KOM makes a common fallacy among Christians, namely, assuming to speak for Jesus by equating their opinion with the one that Jesus would hold if he walked the world today. WWJD may make for a good reflection, but when you ask the question of others, and then answer for Jesus, you do nothing but beg the question at hand.

Let us not forget that Jesus also condemned whole cities to death. He is meek and gentle, but He is not a “tame lion.” Let us not be quick to presume that we know the mind of God so well.

God, as a creator of man can decide on any man’s fate. He can judge, and punish, save or kill any of His creation because He knows everything. He can destroy everything and build again if He so choses.
But man is imperfect in his deeds and judgements. Jesus asked a man who had not sinned to throw the first stone at Mary Magdeline.
Who is sinless in the Catholic Church, or in this whole world, that he can throw even the first stone at an accused sinner,- leave alone executing death penalty on him?

 

[frantony]

Pope Innocent I was way ahead of you.

"It must be remembered that power was granted by God [to the magistrates], and to avenge crime by the sword was permitted. He who carries out this vengeance is God’s minister (Romans 13:1-4). Why should we condemn a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God’s authority.

(Innocent 1, Epist. 6, C. 3. 8, ad Exsuperium, Episcopum Tolosanum,
20 February 405, PL 20,495)

Pilate reminds Jesus that he has the power to crucify Him. Jesus says that Pilate’s power was given to him from above. It is clear that Jesus was talking about Pilate’s power to crucify, as that is the only specific power mentioned in this exchange between Pilate and Jesus.

*Anybody with a AK- 47 has the power to kill, given by God above. What we are talking of is not about using power, but about the ethics and morality of using that power.

By your argument, Herod, Pilate and Caephas can be justified in crucifying Jesus, because power was given to them for doing it from above.
Herod the Great (father of Herod)- who had ordered the slaughter of the infants thirty years before Jesus’trial can also be justified, because he also was given power to do so from “above”.*

 

[frantony]

Pope Innocent I was way ahead of you.

"It must be remembered that power was granted by God [to the magistrates], and to avenge crime by the sword was permitted. He who carries out this vengeance is God’s minister (Romans 13:1-4). Why should we condemn a practice that all hold to be permitted by God? We uphold, therefore, what has been observed until now, in order not to alter the discipline and so that we may not appear to act contrary to God’s authority.

(Innocent 1, Epist. 6, C. 3. 8, ad Exsuperium, Episcopum Tolosanum,
20 February 405, PL 20,495)

Pilate reminds Jesus that he has the power to crucify Him. Jesus says that Pilate’s power was given to him from above. It is clear that Jesus was talking about Pilate’s power to crucify, as that is the only specific power mentioned in this exchange between Pilate and Jesus.

*Pilate had as much power as Hitler had, to send the Jews to gas chambers.
By your argument,you cannot condemn Hitler also, because he was only punishing the Jews for killing Jesus Christ, and was permitted by God. *

 

[frantony]

PJPII used his own personal opinion (prudential judgement) on the death penalty, basing its restrictions on the highly fallible and variable human prison system, which he wrongly evaluated, therefore putting innocents more at risk, shielding murderers from execution, with the unjust result of knowingly placing the lives of murderers over the lives of the innocent, more of whom will die based upon PJPII’s teaching, which offers less of a defense of society, as below.

“The Death Penalty: More Protection for Innocents”
homicidesurvivors.com/2009/07/05/the-death-penalty-more-protection-for-innocents.aspx

Pope John Paul II: Prudential Judgement and the death penalty
homicidesurvivors.com/2007/07/23/pope-john-paul-ii-his-death-penalty-errors.aspx

EXAMPLES

1. a) Anwar al Awlaki, a spiritual leader at two mosques where three 9/11 hijackers worshipped, a native-born U.S. citizen who left the United States in 2002, was arrested in 2006 with a small group of suspected al-Qaida militants in the capital San’a. He was released more than a year later after signing a pledge he will not break the law or leave the country. He is now missing and encourages violence against Americans from his website, Awlaki used his site to declare support for the Somali terrorist group, al-Shabaab and celebrated the acts of US Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, who murdered 13 and wounding 29 in a shooting spree. al Awlaki called upon other Muslim’s to duplicate those acts. “Radical imam praises alleged Fort Hood shooter”, Associated Press, 11/9/09, 6:19 pm ET news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091109/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_fort_hood_muslims

b) 16 al Quaeda Escape in Jailbreak in Iraq
theage.com.au/world/alqaeda-members-in-jailbreak-20090924-g4no.html

c) 23 escape from Yemen prison, 13 are al Quaeda
globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/massive_jailbreak_in_yemen.htm

d) Repeat sex offender,“cripple” serving life, overpowers guards, escapes
blog.taragana.com/law/2009/11/30/authorities-sex-offender-pulls-gun-on-texas-guards-during-prison-transfer-search-ongoing-17934/

e) Governor commutes 108 year sentence: Offender later murders 4 policemen, while on bond for two child rapes
google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5if_tdQrE5B6tvgSYXBtfmfMOLEwwD9CACTHG0

f) Officials “embarrassed” by Texas death row inmate escape, Houston Chronicle, November 06, 2005 policeone.com/corrections/articles/120563-Officials-embarrassed-by-Texas-death-row-inmate-escape/

“. . . Thompson claimed he had an appointment with his lawyer and was taken to a meeting room. However, the visitor was not Thompson’s attorney.” “After the visitor left, Thompson removed his handcuffs and his bright orange prison jumpsuit and got out of a prisoner’s booth that should have been locked. He then left wearing a dark blue shirt, khaki pants and white tennis shoes, carrying a fake identification badge and claiming to work for the Texas Attorney General’s office.” “This was 100 percent human error; that’s the most frustrating thing about it.” “There were multiple failures.” Trial jurors and victim’s relatives were terrified.

g) the Holy See could find these types of cases every day seemingly forever, if it cared to look.

*For all the crimes U.S had done around the world in the last 10 years (go through the wiki leaked documents), all Americans deserve to be sentenced to death. They are lucky that I don’t believe in capital punishment. *

 

[starshiptrooper]

You are confused between the ability to do something and the authority to do it.

You are also confused when it comes to the difference between the authorities using their God-given power for a lawful purpose and using their power for an evil purpose.

 

[frantony]

“the primary purpose of punishment is to redress the order that the crime messed up.”

How can you redress the effect of a murder by killing the murderer. You will become as guilty of murder as the original murderer. Capital punishment serves no purpose to the victim, or the accused or the society. It denies an opportunity for a sinner to reconcile and live a fruitful life afterwards. Capital punishment is an act of revenge and we are asked to “Pass the burden of revenge on to God where it belongs.”

We can trust God to fully take care of justice. We can ask Him to implement His justice like the Psalmist did. This might speed up the judgment, but in the end God will surely carry out full justice on every wrong carried out on earth whether we ask Him or not. This is God’s nature and duty. He is fully equipped and motivated to bring about judgment. This is an important issue. Read on carefully. At the end we will find a completely different approach that will free us from this need to bring harm to those who have done wrong to us or our loved ones.

A common reason people want to hold on to their unforgiving spirit is to bring proper revenge. “If I don’t do it, no one else will!” In all cases where a real wrong has been done (and there are innumerable such cases), revenge is due. Their desire for revenge is not wrong. This is the sense of justice that God has instilled in man.

However, they are carrying justice out in the wrong way.
God will take complete revenge. When we think of the consequences of eternal fire, could we want more than this? Really?

We know next to nothing about carrying out proper revenge. Do we really know all that has happened? Only God knows the details and has the power to bring about justice. Our ‘revenge’ would bring about more injustice!

Those who carry out revenge directly disobey the scriptures. They interfere with God’s rule when they try to carry out revenge. God claims only He should take revenge. “Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath [of God,] for it is written, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY,” says the Lord” Romans 12:19.

Carrying out revenge keeps us from focusing on other scripture that God did tell us to obey. We are to forgive those who have offended us after the model of Jesus Christ.
“Bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you.” (Colossians 2:13).
“For if you forgive men for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive men, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions.” Matthew 6:145-15

When we nurture our hate wounds, we cannot carry out God’s commission of love. Jesus in Matthew 5:43-44 said, “You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR, and hate your enemy. But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.” We are called to love not only those who without prior motive have hurt us or our loved ones such as a drunk driver. But we also are to love those who purposely hate us. These are our enemies.

People insult God when they say they cannot forgive. They are essentially saying that God’s judgment is insufficient. If the person is a Christian, then Christ indeed has paid for their sin. If they are not Christ’s, then God said judgment is His call. 1 Peter 4:17-18 says,
"For [it is] time for judgment to begin with the household of God;
and if [it begins] with us first,
what [will be] the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?
18 AND IF IT IS WITH DIFFICULTY THAT THE RIGHTEOUS IS SAVED,
WHAT WILL BECOME OF THE GODLESS MAN AND THE SINNER?

Jesus Christ set the course for a whole new approach to handling offenses. We are not saying that this pattern was not set in the Old Testament. It was. However, Jesus Christ’s life and work on the cross made it so much clearer for all of us. He offers us a way of living that goes far beyond anyone could have dreamed.

Two points to keep in mind here:
(1) God went to great means to forgive man of their sin. His only Son Jesus Christ died for the guilty. We are called to live in a similiar spirit of mercy. Do not pass judgment but bear patiently with the guilty.

(2) God wants us to go further than to just forbear the guilty. We could pass judgment just as God could have. But He wants us to take the opportunity to pass grace and kindness on to those who have grieved and offended us. Again, Christ was and is the perfect example of this.

This door of mercy and grace will be open only a little while longer. God is holding the door of grace open so that more guilty people like us can experience God’s rich grace and mercy. 2 Peter 3:9-10a says,

“The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness,
but is patient toward you,
not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance.
10* But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, …”

We need to take God’s patience which holds back judgment to pass on His grace and love. One of the most strategic times to do this is when we have been offended. People that have hurt us expect us to act like the rest of the world. But we are to forgive. We are to love. We are to be like Christ.

 

[frantony]

You are confused between the ability to do something and the authority to do it.

You are also confused when it comes to the difference between the authorities using their God-given power for a lawful purpose and using their power for an evil purpose.

In this world, America has the authority to get Assange arrested. But the question is whether it it is moral or ethical. In this world POWER IS MIGHT, and vice versa, but not for long. If you are powerful and don’t use it ethically, or wisely, you will soon lose that power.

A few centuries ago, Catholic popes had the power, which they mis-used. Time is not far when Divine Justice will catch up with them. Already, the world cares two hoots for what the Papacy talks or thinks. If they do not change the way they think, they will die a natural death (In the U.S and many other places, Catholic Churches are being converted into BINGO dens or Muslim mosques and attendance is poor the rest even on Sundays ), or the rest of the world will give them a dose of their own medicine.

In 1231, Pope Gregory IX formally instituted the papal Inquistition. Then Gregory copied a law of Emperor Frederick II, and ordered convicted heretics to be seized by authorities and burned.

Pope Innocent IV, Bull Ad Exstirpanda (May 15, 1252). This fateful document introduced confession-extorting torture into tribunals of the Inquisition. It had already been reinstated in secular processes over the previous hundred years, during which Roman Law was being vigorously revived. Innocent’s Bull prescribes that captured heretics, being “murderers of souls as well as robbers of God’s sacraments and of the Christian faith, . . . are to be coerced – as are thieves and bandits – into confessing their errors and accusing others, although one must stop short of danger to life or limb”.33

On June 15, 1520 Pope Leo X issued the papal bull “Exsurge Domine” and on January 3, 1521 excommunicated Martin Luther. This bull was widely ignored (and was publicly burned by Luther). The bill said that the statement “That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit” was an error, thereby endorsing the burning of heretics [3].

I think it would be silly of us to think that the subjects of the Papacy went against his will in persecuting heretics.

There are Catholics still today who believe that the Church had the Power and right to torture and to burn heretics - Which is truly sad.

My question to starshiptrooper is: If the Roman Church reinstituted the burning of heretics, would you support them?

Would you support them burning a believing in Christ for not confessing that Eucharist is the body of Christ?

Who has authority to kill another man? the pope, or Hitler, or President of Iran? or President of the United States? I think it is not me but you who are confused.