GOD is pro-military.
Killing in the Name of...
- Thread starter Nihilo
- Start date
How I read it, is that Ecclesiastes 8:11 (KJV) is not about whether capital criminals should or shouldn't be tortured before they ultimately die, Ecclesiastes 8:11 (KJV) is about captial criminals who are allowed to live for a long time, before their sentence is "executed." If their sentence were executed speedily, then criminals guilty of capital offenses would not live for long, before their sentence is executed. The sentence itself can still involve brutal, and since its torture, relatively long-lasting (that'd be the point, to lengthen the condemned's misery as much as possible, as just dessert for their capital crime) torture, so long as the sentence is executed speedily; that is, not months or years later. That's how I read it . . . .
Because He's pro-justice; unlike Meshak here.
I'm not concerned with how brutal the death is, as long as it is done swiftly.How I read it, is that Ecclesiastes 8:11 (KJV) is not about whether capital criminals should or shouldn't be tortured before they ultimately die, Ecclesiastes 8:11 (KJV) is about captial criminals who are allowed to live for a long time, before their sentence is "executed." If their sentence were executed speedily, then criminals guilty of capital offenses would not live for long, before their sentence is executed. The sentence itself can still involve brutal, and since its torture, relatively long-lasting (that'd be the point, to lengthen the condemned's misery as much as possible, as just dessert for their capital crime) torture, so long as the sentence is executed speedily; that is, not months or years later. That's how I read it . . . .
Torture is more for the person doing the killing to get some sort of satisfaction or to teach them a lesson (so to speak).
Torture is not justice. And there is no need to teach a lesson, as the guy is about to be dead and can't utilize any "lesson".
Our legal system fails miserably with the "speedy" execution.
According to the law that GOD gave Israel, there had to be a least 2 eye witnesses to the crime.
Deuteronomy 17:6 KJV
(6) At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.
If those 2 witnesses lied, then the blood would be on their hands.
Why?
Because it was the eye witnesses that were to initiate the sentence by casting the first stones.
The condemnation of the guilty lies solely on the witnesses.
(7) The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.
By law, the ones that were to cast the FIRST stone had to be the witnesses themselves.
We would probably have far less frivolous law suits and far less innocent lives condemned if this were the system.
Right-tee-oh.
I am. Brutal crimes deserve brutal punishment. All I ask is that we acknowledge that a "humane," "merciful" killing is in fact a true mercy, and not because we cannot stomach the penalty that capital criminals have justly brought upon themselves, which is a torturous and drawn-out death.
I disagree. The people doing the killing never got anything out of the torture, that's why people decided that swift and painless deaths were preferable. That is, people were cowards with weak stomachs. The end result is that we are granting a mercy to capital criminals already, in outlawing torture as part of their death sentence. This should be acknowledged.
It should be acknowledged that already, when the death penalty is executed swiftly and as painlessly as possible, that this is a mercy. We ought to make that explicit. They do deserve the most heinous punishment, for their most heinous crimes.
It is justice. Capital crimes, we're talking about here. Murderers put a permanent end to a life here on earth, with the harm they cause radiating outward around their victim, to friends and families and neighborhoods, and they deserve not only torture, but long drawn-out torture, as far as torture goes. The breaking wheel tended to precede death by a number of days before the condemned ultimately succumbed to injuries and to exposure (exposure included birds pecking at their flesh even while they still breathed).
It does.
My self, I think that western justice systems are adequate at proving when a capital crime has occurred, and who is responsible for it.
And thus the commandment forbidding false witness; it's much more grave than just not lying. :thumb:
I'd settle for less murderers. :idunno:
The church should deal with their own members' sins.
If they commit a crime in the world, then they will take care of them.
The church has never been given the authority by God to deal with crime.
Why are you reviving a thread who's last post was more than a year ago?
Because I just found this one.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
How?
Here is how the Catholic Church deals with sins. The ideal state (easily obtainable) is to be Catholic 'in full communion' with the Church, which authorizes Catholics to receive Holy Communion.
Committing grave sin breaks communion with the Church, and requires that the Catholic reconcile with the Church through confession and penance. The Church further reserves the right to formally 'excommunicate' people, which denies them the ability to reconcile with the Church. Catholics who commit grave sins are positionally the same as non-Catholic Christians; neither can licitly receive Holy Communion.
Committing light sin does not break communion with the Church. These sins are designated 'venial' which means 'forgiven.' It is the Church who forgives these sins, as this 'forgiveness' regards communion, and not eternal salvation. Bona fide Christians, those who believe in Christ, are forgiven all eternal penalties for all their sins, but need to reconcile with the Church in order to be 'in full communion' with her.
If the crime is being hidden, there is no way to find the truth.
The police cannot find the truth if everyone tries to cover up.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You need a treadmill if you're a grave sinner.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
The Church's last resort to 'bind' and 'loose,' or to 'remit' and 'retain' (Mt16:19KJV & Jn20:23KJV) is formal excommunication. It is when Catholics stop talking with you. You're not welcome anymore. You've worn out your welcome, if you're excommunicated. It is positionally distinct from not being 'in full communion.' Formal excommunication means Catholics stop talking with you.
Catholics don't . . . the Church doesn't equip Catholics to search for people's sins, and if Catholics are naturally talented at it, they do not judge what they find. There are three levels wrt sin, for a Christian; excommunication, 'in full communion,' and not 'in full communion.'
Anybody who's Catholic can go to confession to reconcile with the Church, to be 'in full communion.'
Excommunication is exceptionally rare.
The hardest part of becoming 'in full communion,' is not being Catholic. Catholics like AMR here, can just go to confession, and then, bang, he's back 'in full communion.'
Unless he is saddled with a debt from breaking solemn vows, that . . . I'm not sure what that does, if anything, but solemn vows are . . . they sound a bit serious. If AMR broke solemn vows of some sort, then that's beyond my ken as to what if any consequences there are for that.
This is all 'If,' of course.
Hi Meshak.
Last edited:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
So you don't run afoul of 1st Corinthians 11:27 KJV & 1st Corinthians 11:29 KJV, and so the Church doesn't run afoul of 1st Corinthians 5:11 KJV.
I know all of that. And the most, if not all, organizations or groups are in the same category, in my experience. what you say is just tip of iceberg.
That's why I don't belong to any denomination or organization. Even their condition of salvation is so way off.
I just gave you my perspective of what Jesus teaches.
hi Idolater
Last edited:
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You do? How did you come to learn all that?
I don't understand what you mean. It's the tip of what iceberg?
What if the Catholic Church is Jesus's own Church, that He founded? What if the Catholic Church is the Church the Apostles labored to build up before they died?
Me too.
hi Idolater
You do? How did you come to learn all that?
I don't understand what you mean. It's the tip of what iceberg?
What if the Catholic Church is Jesus's own Church, that He founded? What if the Catholic Church is the Church the Apostles labored to build up before they died?
Me too.
My point is that corruption of the organization is found in many ways.
do you know that original RCC set the condition of being a Christian or salvation?
that's the original corruption starting point.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
There's no substantive corruption in the Catholic Church. And the Catholic Church's 'condition of being a Christian or salvation' is exactly what the Bible says it is: Believe in Christ; believe in the Gospel; believe that He is risen from the dead.