- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:22 pm to HurricaneTiger
quote:
Leviticus 24:16. God’s own law practices the death penalty. To say that someone who supports the death penalty is not pro-life, is then attributing that same characteristic to God.
The wage for sin IS DEATH. Christ was sentenced to death because of our sin.
I do find this philosophically interesting. And as someone (Jrv2damac) added on pg 4:
quote:
Genesis 9:6
Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed
Exodus 21:12
Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death
Here is my opinion. I honestly don't know how well it lines up to Catholic, Orthodox, or other schools of thought, but it is how I see it...
There is a tendency for some people to look at OT scripture like your post and what I quoted above from pg4 and dismiss it as the old covenant, which is no longer valid under the new covenant of Jesus... True in a way, but not exactly in a "that was then, this is now" way.
It seems to me to that these covenants (old = eye for an eye; new = love thy neighbor) exist side by side in contemporaneous fashion and describe ontological levels of being.
Without getting into the whole Chain of Being, suffice to say there is a progression of lower to higher faculties by which a man can guide his life. On the lower end, we can recognize a man who only lives by lower instincts (hunger, lust, etc) to be in some ways inferior and animal-like in comparison to a man who is perhaps a more devout, conscious follower of laws. And we can perceive that there are even fewer men who are not just passively good, but there is something of an active, conscious quality that makes them not just follow rules like sheep, but actively strive to live more morally pure than the mere laws of men dictate. Christ is the archetype of this more deeply spiritual, active, conscious principle of soul and spirit being stronger than the lower instincts and drives that lead other men.
If one steps back, one can see that what Christ did on the cross was to not slip into a lower state of consciousness. He did not retaliate against his a-hole oppressors. Nor did he passively turn the other cheek. In a moment of pain, he did not ask God to forgive them. His soul was fully actively and he stated from a place of authority for God to forgive them. It was a command. (Note the change in tone from the night before. When he was praying for his own skin the night before it, it lacked the authority he prayed with on the cross and was more passive, roughly: Lord, if this isnt really necessary then please take this cup (my ordeal) away.
It was his ability to be live in a place of spiritual activity without falling into a lower state on the cross that made his sacrifice successful and reconnected the soul of man to God. It was thus act of courage and spiritual strength that repaired the stain in Adam's soul when he sinned and hid from God. We, of course (imho), have to aspire to follow Jesus in example, not just say with hollow words that we believe in him. Jesus himself addresses that sort of person when he says some in the afterlife who use his name and think they'll have it made will be surprised to find their fate is not so rosy because they did not really know him.
As this pertains to the OP...
- The laws of man are valid enough as long as they don't lead men to sin, though any such laws are ontologically inferior to the spiritual laws that Jesus lived up to. As I see it, ICE can deport every illegal in the country and I don't think there is a risk of damnation of any ICE agents for doing so.
- There is a higher level which Jesus reached. Killing someone else is generally bad, though we can certainly quibble about some examples (law enforcement, soldiers, etc). The Pope's statements on abortion and the death penalty are consistent enough with this. But the Pope's attempt to put deportations in the same category appears to be a tacit criticism of US policy, and it misses the mark. He is either poorly informed and being reactive or is being disingenuous, though slippery enough to avoid being pinned for stanning for Marxism.
This post was edited on 10/3/25 at 12:34 pm
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:23 pm to OysterPoBoy
quote:What were their countries of origin doing to them?
inhuman treatment of immigrants
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:26 pm to FooManChoo
But that has not happened yet. So should we operate as His regent in His absence deigning to interpret what he might do versus what he did do?
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:38 pm to epbart
quote:
There is a higher level which Jesus reached. Killing someone else is generally bad, though we can certainly quibble about some examples (law enforcement, soldiers, etc).
My main problem isn’t an argument for or against the death penalty. It’s the statement of saying that being for the death penalty is not pro-life. He’s attributing that our creator is not pro-life, whether he meant to or not.
He’s the pope. It’s important that he provides clarity.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:46 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
Now, and question should ask themself a simple question. Would Jesus flip the switch on someone strapped into and electrical chair? And real Christian knows that answer.
-----
Jesus will return in judgement of the entire world from all ages, which will include the eternal death penalty of everlasting judgement (Rev. 21:8).
In a sense, when Jesus returns, He will "flip the switch" on a lot of people.
Sort of... but I think the second coming will not be like Jesus flipping a switch to actively kill the damned (which would be against his loving nature).
It would be more likely that his return will bring a revelation of truth and the damned will have an epiphany, like... ohh shite, I suicided my soul and I'm not moving forward (akin to how a drug user might realize they destroyed their earthly life... but more permanent).
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:48 pm to FooManChoo
Makes sense to me, thanks!
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:53 pm to OysterPoBoy
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:54 pm to TankBoys32
Oyster Poboy is my favorite poster on this site.
His introduction of this topic, and his "pope can't be wrong" reply on first page is classic.
Sorry bud but I think OPB should be the next pope.
His introduction of this topic, and his "pope can't be wrong" reply on first page is classic.
Sorry bud but I think OPB should be the next pope.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:55 pm to HurricaneTiger
quote:
My main problem isn’t an argument for or against the death penalty. It’s the statement of saying that being for the death penalty is not pro-life. He’s attributing that our creator is not pro-life, whether he meant to or not.
Ahh, I see. I wasn't quite sure, but in truth, your post just sort of sent me on a philosophical tangent, which I felt compelled to chase in my reply.
quote:
He’s the pope. It’s important that he provides clarity.
Fully agree. As I said before, as well, I suspect him of intentionally straddling the fence with that statement... trying to not overtly criticize Trump/ICE while giving a soundbite to the Left to do exactly that. And, if so, that's wrong.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:56 pm to KiwiHead
quote:We don't have to pit one against the other.
But that has not happened yet. So should we operate as His regent in His absence deigning to interpret what he might do versus what he did do?
My only point in mentioning that He will come in judgement is that it isn't against His character to execute justice, which is what the death penalty is. If Jesus isn't opposed to eternal suffering in Hell as divine justice, why should He be opposed to temporal justice in the death penalty?
Your question is a good one, though, which is why we should examine Jesus' life according to the Scriptures to determine whether or not Jesus upheld the law (moral, civil, and judicial) and gave an example of how to think about justice.
In addition, we should look at the rest of the NT's commentary on such things, which is why I mentioned in a previous post that Paul spoke about the death penalty at least twice (Acts 25 and Romans 13). Since all of Scripture is God-breathed, we can't pit Paul against Jesus but must interpret both together in a unifying way.
Jesus did uphold the law, including performing a miracle to pay taxes (Matt. 17:24-27). He also submitted to both the Jewish and Roman rulers when brought to trial. The death penalty was part of both Jewish/Mosaic and Roman law, and He never taught against that, even when given specific opportunities to do so.
This post was edited on 10/3/25 at 1:11 pm
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:57 pm to EarnYourStripes
quote:
Oyster Poboy is my favorite poster on this site.
His introduction of this topic, and his "pope can't be wrong" reply on first page is classic.
I'm just assuming his "pope can't be wrong" nonsense was sarcasm. It has to be, right?
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:58 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Enforced and executed on society at large. At that point whether it was religious law or secular is irrelevant.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 12:59 pm to epbart
Post more.
That's not sarcasm either. I mean that.
Won't even attempt to restate what you said in my own words. Thank you for taking the time to share that.
That's not sarcasm either. I mean that.
Won't even attempt to restate what you said in my own words. Thank you for taking the time to share that.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:08 pm to epbart
quote:I appreciate your sensitivities to this.
Sort of... but I think the second coming will not be like Jesus flipping a switch to actively kill the damned (which would be against his loving nature).
It would be more likely that his return will bring a revelation of truth and the damned will have an epiphany, like... ohh shite, I suicided my soul and I'm not moving forward (akin to how a drug user might realize they destroyed their earthly life... but more permanent).
One thing I'd like to call out is that God's justice is not opposed to His love. Divine simplicity is a doctrine that says that God is not made up of parts, and He is not partially loving and partially just, but perfectly and wholly loving and perfectly and wholly just. Therefore, His justice is not unloving, and since His justice requires death (Ez. 18:4; Rom. 6:23), the death penalty is not a contradiction of His love.
Jesus talks more about Hell than even love, and we know quite a lot about eternal judgement from Jesus' comments and from what is said about Jesus in the New Testament. One of the themes that is repeated over and over again is that Hell won't just be a revelation of truth, but a place of suffering where people will be actively thrown into. It's not merely an awareness that comes to a person, but an action that happens to them.
This is an uncomfortable subject and one that a lot of people don't even like to think about, but we have to be able to align our thinking to the teaching of the Scriptures.
Let me quote the extended portion of the verse I referenced before, where it highlights the loving nature of God as well as His justice:
And he who was seated on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new.” Also he said, “Write this down, for these words are trustworthy and true.” And he said to me, “It is done! I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end. To the thirsty I will give from the spring of the water of life without payment. The one who conquers will have this heritage, and I will be his God and he will be my son. But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death.” -Rev. 21:5-8
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:16 pm to OysterPoBoy
quote:This is plain retarded.
Someone who says ‘I’m against abortion but says I am in favor of the death penalty’ is not really pro-life,”
“Pro Life” has a set definition at this point. So on that alone his comment is just, well retarded.
But there’s such a clear and distinct difference in killing someone for HORRIFIC crimes that took lives and killing the single most innocent creature on earth, an unborn baby.
Idk why I even wasted time typing that. No sane person would possibly disagree.
The left is evil. And I’m slightly pro choice(I understand that makes me evil in the eyes of some).
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:18 pm to OysterPoBoy
oh look another gay leftist pope
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:18 pm to OysterPoBoy
Glad I'm not Catholic. Idiotic statement.
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:23 pm to TankBoys32
Well, it’s legal to sell your daughter for marriage per the Bible. And the Bible also forbids eating of pork and shell fish. As a Christian follow Christ….WWJD?
Posted on 10/3/25 at 1:28 pm to OysterPoBoy
I’m not pro life.
I’m anti murder
Executing a prisoner is not murder
I’m anti murder
Executing a prisoner is not murder
Page 7 of 15
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News