Thou Shalt Not Kill

[itullian]

If you argue that the Hebrew verb רצח means “murder” (a legal term) then you would also have to render the act of a legally sanctioned execution in Nu. 35:30 as murder. In English we don’t refer to a legal execution as “murder” or “taking an innocent life.”

a murderer isnt innocent

 

[Dave_Noonan]

a murderer isnt innocent

Precisely. But would you say that a legally sanctioned execution is “murder”?

 

[itullian]

Precisely. But would you say that a legally sanctioned execution is “murder”?

depends on if the system is credible.
and what the crime is.
in the US, no.

 

[Dave_Noonan]

depends on if the system is credible.
and what the crime is.
in the US, no.

So then do you consider the ancient Israelite executioner a murderer?

If you do consider the Israelite executioner a murderer (or along the line of thought that all execution, legal or not, constitutes immoral murder), only then would it be consistent to say that the commandment in English should read “thou shalt not murder.”

But, if you consider the Israelite executioner of Numbers 35:30 legally authorized to do what he’s doing, then “thou shalt not kill” is the only English translation option for the commandment in Ex. 20:13–because the act of the executioner in Numbers 35:30 is the same Hebrew verb (רצח) that’s used in the commandment in Exodus 20:13.

 

[itullian]

So then do you consider the ancient Israelite executioner a murderer?

If you do consider the Israelite executioner a murderer (or along the line of thought that all execution, legal or not, constitutes immoral murder), only then would it be consistent to say that the commandment in English should read “thou shalt not murder.”

But, if you consider the Israelite executioner of Numbers 35:30 legally authorized to do what he’s doing, then “thou shalt not kill” is the only English translation option for the commandment in Ex. 20:13–because the act of the executioner in Numbers 35:30 is the same Hebrew verb (רצח) that’s used in the commandment in Exodus 20:13.

different times
context

all execution is not murder

 

[Mar044]

Sorry I am not washing my hands, How killing an indefense non combatant is NOT murder? You make no sense and are twisting my meaning!
However war CAN be just and people ARE killed in them. Does NOT make such killings Murder! Therefore you would not be breaking that commandment. This is what the Church teaches.

ok so someone declares war on your country, kills your little girl by walking up to her and shooter her in the head for no reason is justified? to god laws their are mens laws and you cant just do that. i think how i said it came out wrong, i was trying to say, god understands if a person is shooting at you or you join the army and fight a battle it’s war. but if you kill a village for no reason, unarmed, and are non combatants then its murder.

 

[fhansen]

Is a more accurate translation of this commandment: “Thou shalt not take an innocent life”?

Thanks,
ClemtheCatholic

I think it means that any taking of human life by man is unnatural, as in* not meant to be.* But living in an already fallen world, where sin ensures that injustices will occur, the Church recognizes that the lesser of two evils may in some cases be to take the life of those who pose a threat to the life and well-being of others. OTOH in a perfect, unfallen, world the command wouldn’t even need to be given-God’s will for man would be obeyed.

 

[Mar044]

different times
context

all execution is not murder

actually it is, you do know that when a prisoner is put to death it is marked as Homicide, even though it was carried out by the state…

all execution is murder, no person can take a life other then gods will, execution in any form is murder as is to lie to spare a person his feelings. it doesn’t matter why.

 

[itullian]

actually it is, you do know that when a prisoner is put to death it is marked as Homicide, even though it was carried out by the state…

all execution is murder, no person can take a life other then gods will, execution in any form is murder as is to lie to spare a person his feelings. it doesn’t matter why.

oh, really? like in war?

sorry, disagree
murder is the killing of an innocent

God commands a life be taken for a life.

yes, a lie is a lie.
but a lie can be good.
you would lie to a Nazi to save a Jews life wouldnt you?

 

[Brendan]

actually it is, you do know that when a prisoner is put to death it is marked as Homicide, even though it was carried out by the state…

all execution is murder, no person can take a life other then gods will, execution in any form is murder as is to lie to spare a person his feelings. it doesn’t matter why.

Here is the Council of Trent on the 5th Commandment

Note the bolded part in relation to executions.

Two Parts Of This Commandment

In the explanation of this Commandment the Lord points out its twofold obligation. The one is prohibitory and forbids us to kill; the other is mandatory and commands us to cherish sentiments of charity, concord and friendship towards our enemies, to have peace with all men, and finally, to endure with patience every inconvenience.

The Prohibitory Part of this Commandment

Exceptions: The Killing Of Animals

With regard to the prohibitory part, it should first be taught what kinds of killing are not forbidden by this Commandment. It is not prohibited to kill animals; for if God permits man to eat them, it is also lawful to kill them. When, says St. Augustine, we hear the words, “Thou shalt not kill,” we do not understand this of the fruits of the earth, which are insensible, nor of irrational animals, which form no part of human society.

Execution Of Criminals

Another kind of lawful slaying belongs to the civil authorities, to whom is entrusted power of life and death, by the legal and judicious exercise of which they punish the guilty and protect the innocent. The just use of this power, far from involving the crime of murder, is an act of paramount obedience to this Commandment which prohibits murder. The end of the Commandment is the preservation and security of human life. Now the punishments inflicted by the civil authority, which is the legitimate avenger of crime, naturally tend to this end, since they give security to life by repressing outrage and violence. Hence these words of David: In the morning I put to death all the wicked of the land, that I might cut off all the workers of iniquity from the city of the Lord.

Killing In A Just War

In like manner, the soldier is guiltless who, actuated not by motives of ambition or cruelty, but by a pure desire of serving the interests of his country, takes away the life of an enemy in a just war.

Furthermore, there are on record instances of carnage executed by the special command of God. The sons of Levi, who put to death so many thousands in one day, were guilty of no sin; when the slaughter had ceased, they were addressed by Moses in these words: You have consecrated your hands this day to the Lord.

Killing By Accident

Again, death caused, not by intent or design, but by accident, is not murder. He that killeth his neighbour ignorantly, says the book of Deuteronomy, and who is proved to have had no hatred against him yesterday and the day before, but to have gone with him to the wood to hew wood, and in cutting down the tree the axe slipt out of his hand, and the iron slipping from the handle struck his friend and killed him, shall live. Such accidental deaths, because inflicted without intent or design, involve no guilt whatever, and this is confirmed by the words of St. Augustine: God forbid that what we do for a good and lawful end shall be imputed to us, if, contrary to our intention, evil thereby befall any one.

There are, however, two cases in which guilt attaches (to accidental death). The first case is when death results from an unlawful act; when, for instance, a person kicks or strikes a woman in a state of pregnancy, and abortion follows. The consequence, it is true, may not have been intended, but this does not exculpate the offender, because the act of striking a pregnant woman is in itself unlawful. The other case is when death is caused by negligence, carelessness or want of due precaution.

Killing In Self Defense
If a man kill another in self defense, having used every means consistent with his own safety to avoid the infliction of death, he evidently does not violate this Commandment.

 

[Angelsflight]

It only applies to humans. We are free to kill bugs etc.

Oh, I know…I just always feel so guilty when I kill them though. Except for cockroaches

 

[JerryZ]

actually it is, you do know that when a prisoner is put to death it is marked as Homicide, even though it was carried out by the state…

all execution is murder, no person can take a life other then gods will, execution in any form is murder as is to lie to spare a person his feelings. it doesn’t matter why.

The law requires that when you express yourself you need to use precise legal terms.
That is why you or me cannot or rather should try not to self represent ourselves when dealing with the judicial system.

Homicide comes from the Latin word Homicidium

Homo = Man and Cidium from Occidere = Kill

So the act of a man dieing of unnatural causes = Homicide

Then the law goes onto the different degrees of homicide like:

Manslaughter = (homicide without malice aforethought)

Murder = (unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being)

Execution = (putting a condemned person to death) = Homicide

All murders are homicides but not all homicides are murder and the Bible and the Church attests to this.

Hope this helps

 

[itullian]

The law requires that when you express yourself you need to use precise legal terms.
That is why you or me cannot or rather should try not to self represent ourselves when dealing with the judicial system.

Homicide comes from the Latin word Homicidium

Homo = Man and Cidium from Occidere = Kill

So the act of a man dieing of unnatural causes = Homicide

Then the law goes onto the different degrees of homicide like:

Manslaughter = (homicide without malice aforethought)

Murder = (unlawful premeditated killing of a human being by a human being)

Execution = (putting a condemned person to death) = Homicide

All murders are homicides but not all homicides are murder and the Bible and the Church attests to this.

Hope this helps

thanks

 

[thistle]

true, we are free to.
so we can choose.

I choose to kill any mosquito, ant, fly, cockroach or any other disease transmitting bug which can harm me or my family. I would say anyone who cares about their family would do the same. Simply waving an arm around does not get rid of them.

 

[Angelsflight]

I choose to kill any mosquito, ant, fly, cockroach or any other disease transmitting bug which can harm me or my family. I would say anyone who cares about their family would do the same. Simply waving an arm around does not get rid of them.

Yeah, i must say that black widows, brown recluse spiders, and mosquitoes dont have much chance with me either. I probably would kill them if I found one in my house.

 

[itullian]

definitely
black widows and wasps.

 

[R_C]

you would lie to a Nazi…

No, not the “would-you-lie-to-a-Nazi” question again! http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=2066&pictureid=13948

a lie can be good.

Wow, that simplification makes my hair stand on end! A lie can be good? Really? According to what arbitrary criteria, and set by who?

We need to re-read the appropriate chapter of the Catechism: the eigth commandment.

2482 “A lie consists in speaking a falsehood with the intention of deceiving.” The Lord denounces lying as the work of the devil …]

2483 Lying is the most direct offense against the truth. …]

2485 By its very nature, lying is to be condemned.

It’s a very complex topic. There is a *ginormous *difference between lying and not revealing the truth. Not everyone at every moment has the right to know the truth.

2488 The right to the communication of the truth is not unconditional. …] This requires us in concrete situations to judge whether or not it is appropriate to reveal the truth to someone who asks for it.

2489 Charity and respect for the truth should dictate the response to every request for information or communication. The good and safety of others, respect for privacy, and the common good are sufficient reasons for being silent about what ought not be known or for making use of a discreet language. The duty to avoid scandal often commands strict discretion. No one is bound to reveal the truth to someone who does not have the right to know it.

What we need to do is to have a well-formed conscience, think twice before we speak, and be willing to take responsibility for what we say and for what we don’t say, if silence or discretion is the proper course of action.

 

[jwolfie]

I have killed an animal, an innocent animal, a pet. I hope this does not make me a murderer. I hope I did not break the commandment. Nevertheless, blood is on my hands, and I can only hope God will forgive me. If I am not sorry enough, I pray he gives me a repentant heart. I love all my other pets, I love animals and have become vegan since. My priest couldn’t take my confession because we have bed bugs, and I am terrified that I will die before the bugs are taken care of and he can come take my confession.

Is killing a dog or cat murder?? Does the act make you a murderer, or just a killer. Is there any distinction between killer and murderer?

May God have mercy on my soul.

 

[Brendan]

Jwolfie,

Here is the Council of Trent on the subject (of the 5th Commandment)

Exceptions: The Killing Of Animals

With regard to the prohibitory part, it should first be taught what kinds of killing are not forbidden by this Commandment. It is not prohibited to kill animals; for if God permits man to eat them, it is also lawful to kill them. When, says St. Augustine, we hear the words, “Thou shalt not kill,” we do not understand this of the fruits of the earth, which are insensible, nor of irrational animals, which form no part of human society.

 

[PoorKnight]

No, not the “would-you-lie-to-a-Nazi” question again! http://forums.catholic-questions.org/picture.php?albumid=2066&pictureid=13948

Wow, that simplification makes my hair stand on end! A lie can be good? Really? According to what arbitrary criteria, and set by who?

We need to re-read the appropriate chapter of the Catechism: the eigth commandment.

It’s a very complex topic. There is a *ginormous *difference between lying and not revealing the truth. Not everyone at every moment has the right to know the truth.

What we need to do is to have a well-formed conscience, think twice before we speak, and be willing to take responsibility for what we say and for what we don’t say, if silence or discretion is the proper course of action.

Mostly very very good post. However I disagree with the bit that we cannot voice an untruth to someone who is not entitled to the truth:

Exodus 1:15 - 1:19… Midwives told Pharoh something that was not true. They did not just stay silent, but voiced something that was not true.

John 7:2-10 Jesus tells his “brothers” that he was not going to the Feast of Booths, but then goes. Again, Jesus did not just stay silent, but voiced something that was not true.

By who’s standard can we follow what is in Sacred Scripture here? By GOD’s standards as revealed to us through His Church.

Yes you are correct, that not everyone is entitled to the Truth. But as demonstrated in the above texts, we are permitted, in at least the above circumstances, to Voice what is not true to that end.

Again, excellant post.

God Bless