THIS is the reason why I support Death Penalty.

[ND66]

And don’t drag the process of getting them there too!


4 Teens Charged In Beating Death

.

[Dr Mordrid]

Here's a 16 year old honor student minding his own business and two gangs of genetic mutants beat the hell out of him with pieces of railroad ties, kick him mercilessly while he's on the ground and end up killing him. A good kid by all accounts.

Sorry, but I'm way past having any regard for this kind of scum. To the woodchipper with 'em all, feet first so they can "appreciate" what's happening.

And no, putting them in Gladiator Academy (prison) is not the answer. All they'll do there is train the next generation who have a shot at getting out and doing even worse things.

[Brian Ellis]

And God spake all these words, saying,
I am the Lord thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage....

Notice that there are no qualifications, such as capital punishment or war that allow people off the hook. Thou shalt not kill, pure and simple. The fact that these monsters brutally killed someone is not even relevant. If the State kills someone by capital punishment, then it is the people who are breaking God's law, every individual who has not pressed for the savage law on such punishment to be abrogated. If the OT is too old for Christians, then there is plenty in the NT to suggest the same idea. Vengeance killing may be OK in Mafia circles or in 19th century Corsica but this is the 21st century when we should be above this level of savagery which brings us all down to the same level as these vile thugs.

Let Him do the work and, until He does, keep these people going in the toughest conditions with minimal comfort, so that they have time to think over what they have done. Rather than throw the key away, weld up the door of their cell, but never murder them.

[Mehen]

Why is it that the states with the death penalty also have the highest murder rates?

[TransformX]

Notice that there are no qualifications, such as capital punishment or war that allow people off the hook. Thou shalt not kill, pure and simple. The fact that these monsters brutally killed someone is not even relevant. If the State kills someone by capital punishment, then it is the people who are breaking God's law, every individual who has not pressed for the savage law on such punishment to be abrogated. If the OT is too old for Christians, then there is plenty in the NT to suggest the same idea. Vengeance killing may be OK in Mafia circles or in 19th century Corsica but this is the 21st century when we should be above this level of savagery which brings us all down to the same level as these vile thugs.

Let Him do the work and, until He does, keep these people going in the toughest conditions with minimal comfort, so that they have time to think over what they have done. Rather than throw the key away, weld up the door of their cell, but never murder them.

Brian, will you quit the selective reading of the bible and read it thoroughly from one end to the other? You'll be amazed with how many people god has condemned to die. Unlike you, I know my bible, in Hebrew, with some parts by heart, some of which are specifically about killing people in the name of god.

Edit: Try the Book of Deuteronomy, you'll find a lot of cases that end with death there. I don't mean particular people, I mean general laws. Look for stuff with words along

that thou mayst take away the evil out of the midst of thee

[Dr Mordrid]

Brian;

The actual translation is "Thou Shalt not murder", not "Thou Shalt not kill"

"Kill" came in when the translation was made from Greek to Latin and perpetuated when the Latin was translated to English, but doing it directly from Hebrew gives "murder". The Hebrew word for "kill" is הרג (harog) while the Hebrew word for "murder" is רצח (retzach), which is what's found in the oldest texts of the Ten Commandments

"Murder" is currently used in Jewish and modern Protestant texts while Catholics stick to the older, incorrect, translation.

[TransformX]

Brian;

The actual translation is "Thou Shalt not murder", not "Thou Shalt not kill"

"Kill" came in when the translation was made from Greek to Latin and perpetuated when the Latin was translated to English, but doing it directly from Hebrew gives "murder". The Hebrew word for "kill" is הרג (harog) while the Hebrew word for "murder" is רצח (retzach), which is what's found in the oldest texts of the Ten Commandments

"Murder" is currently used in Jewish and modern Protestant texts while Catholics stick to the older, incorrect, translation.

You've beat me to it, I recalled I didn't write it after I left home.

[Brian Ellis]

And murdering by the State is not murder? It is even worse, because it has been premeditated for a long time, certainly in no way opportunistic as may be the case for the original crimes.

I suggest that those in favour of the death penalty may care to read and digest St John ch. 8.

Yes! There is much that is barbaric in the OT. But I live in a Christian/Muslim country and prefer to think that humankind has advanced from what was not written but came from hearsay 4000 years ago.

The oldest complete Torah scroll is maintained by a group of Samaritans in Nablus. This group only adheres to the Torah and does not embrace the Prophets or the Writings. I have never seen where they have allowed it to be dated, although it is estimated to be around 2000 years old. There are other fragments that have been found that date around 700 B.C.

So, no one knows, except by word of mouth, what Moses was supposed to have inscribed on his tablets. Would this not be considered as hearsay over centuries? The same applies to the other books.

There have been a number of good teachers. Many question the veracity of the Gospels because they were written a few decades after Jesus was murdered by a Jewish/Roman conspiracy. If that can be questioned when supposedly written of events in the lifetime of the authors, how much more questionable are those written centuries after the event?

Even today, with all the forensic sciences and video/audio recording we question the veracity of recent events that have been well documented. So I challenge anyone to prove what the original 10 commandments were. And if anyone thinks that this is rubbish, just consider that "evidence" of Hitler's supposed suicide in 1945 has now been shown to be indubitably false, despite all the documentation etc. - and that was barely 60 years ago, certainly I remember, as a 13 y-o kid, the jubilation when it was announced.

[Umfriend]

So what's the argument?
- The gospels can be doubted becuase they were written afterwards, even though by people who lived at the time.
- If those can be doubted than surely older documents can?

If so, why use the torah/NT etc for anything in a reasonable debate?

You lost me.

[TransformX]

And murdering by the State is not murder? It is even worse, because it has been premeditated for a long time, certainly in no way opportunistic as may be the case for the original crimes.

Please check murder in the dictionary Brian. Murder isn't an action, murder is a judgment of an action. Not every killing is murder.

Yes! There is much that is barbaric in the OT. But I live in a Christian/Muslim country and prefer to think that humankind has advanced from what was not written but came from hearsay 4000 years ago.

The Torah was well written and documented since before the birth of Jesus Christ, that is over 2000 years old for you. You can trust the Jews to know the difference between the Torah (written) and the word of mouth which is the Talmud, Mishna etc.

So, no one knows, except by word of mouth, what Moses was supposed to have inscribed on his tablets. Would this not be considered as hearsay over centuries? The same applies to the other books.

Read my reply from above. At least I read and speak the original language of the context, nobody knows what other translation errors have been made over the years, as for the new testament, I don't know it so I can't comment on it.

There have been a number of good teachers. Many question the veracity of the Gospels because they were written a few decades after Jesus was murdered by a Jewish/Roman conspiracy. If that can be questioned when supposedly written of events in the lifetime of the authors, how much more questionable are those written centuries after the event?

Even today, with all the forensic sciences and video/audio recording we question the veracity of recent events that have been well documented. So I challenge anyone to prove what the original 10 commandments were. And if anyone thinks that this is rubbish, just consider that "evidence" of Hitler's supposed suicide in 1945 has now been shown to be indubitably false, despite all the documentation etc. - and that was barely 60 years ago, certainly I remember, as a 13 y-o kid, the jubilation when it was announced.

1. Read Umfriend's comment.
2. Why are you so certain Jesus was a. Murdered, b.due to a conspiracy and c.a Jewish one?
3. If you're so unsure of the validity of the 10 commandments, why do you keep misquoting them over and over again in legal matters?

[Brian Ellis]

Why are you so certain Jesus was a. Murdered, b.due to a conspiracy and c.a Jewish one?

a) he was murdered by crucifixion: do you doubt that historical fact? Various historians such as the Jewish Josephus or the Roman Tacitus do not deny that it happened.

b) and c) as for the Judeo-Roman conspiracy, this is also well documented such as Josephus saying

And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross

"us" being the Jews. Josephus or, rather, Yosef Ben Matityahu leaves this in no doubt. This is also confirmed in the following quote from Wikipedia (Pilate)

Pilate appears in all four canonical Christian Gospels. Mark, depicting Jesus as innocent of plotting against Rome, portrays Pilate as extremely reluctant to execute Jesus, blaming the Jewish hierarchy for his death. In Matthew, Pilate washes his hands of Jesus and reluctantly sends him to his death. In Luke, Pilate not only agrees that Jesus did not conspire against Rome, but Herod Antipas, the tetrarch, also finds nothing treasonous in Jesus' actions. In John, Jesus' claim to be the Son of Man or the Messiah to Pilate or to the Sanhedrin is not portrayed.

According to Mark (a Jew who became Christian) Jesus’ appearance before the Sanhedrin created problems. If Jesus was charged only with blasphemy, the Sanhedrin could have had him stoned to death. The fact that the Sanhedrin dragged him before Pilate, a notoriously cruel man, was obviously a political move. The fact that Pilate was reluctant to condemn him is well substantiated. The fact that the Sanhedrin pressed for Jesus' death and obtained it by Roman means was probably to try and absolve them from the responsibility of murdering a potential Messiah who was a thorn in their side. If things went wrong, they could pass the blame onto the Romans.

[TransformX]

a) he was murdered by crucifixion: do you doubt that historical fact? Various historians such as the Jewish Josephus or the Roman Tacitus do not deny that it happened.

Define murder. Is it a moral or legal act?

b) and c) as for the Judeo-Roman conspiracy, this is also well documented such as Josephus saying

So you believe Josephus but not the Torah?

"us" being the Jews. Josephus or, rather, Yosef Ben Matityahu leaves this in no doubt. This is also confirmed in the following quote from Wikipedia (Pilate)

You'r very inconsistent with credibility to sources ~2000 years old, you know?

According to Mark (a Jew who became Christian) Jesus’ appearance before the Sanhedrin created problems. If Jesus was charged only with blasphemy, the Sanhedrin could have had him stoned to death. The fact that the Sanhedrin dragged him before Pilate, a notoriously cruel man, was obviously a political move. The fact that Pilate was reluctant to condemn him is well substantiated. The fact that the Sanhedrin pressed for Jesus' death and obtained it by Roman means was probably to try and absolve them from the responsibility of murdering a potential Messiah who was a thorn in their side. If things went wrong, they could pass the blame onto the Romans.

According to a man with a political agenda, people with political agendas turned a prominent political figure in, handing him over to the local ruling representative. Do you see where I'm going?

Edit: prime example of said politics: http://www.usatoday.com/news/religio...06-judas_x.htm

Edit continued: If you reject the old testament, you should also reject most of the texts you throw at me here. If you don't reject either, you're more than welcome to start a theological debate on matters you can't even read in the original language.

[Umfriend]

According to Silverman, the blacks did it! (I love that joke, one of the few good ones she came up with).

[Brian Ellis]

Define murder. Is it a moral or legal act?

Both SOED:
1. (An instance of) the unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another, (a) criminal homicide with malice aforethought; (an instance of) the deliberate killing of a human being in a manner or circumstances tantamount to murder. In early use also, (an) instance of non-criminal homicide of a particularly reprehensible kind; fig. (a) mortal sin, (a) great wickedness. OE.

So you believe Josephus but not the Torah?

Josephus' writings are documented from the originals. The Torah isn't, it is an oral hand-me-down.

You'r very inconsistent with credibility to sources ~2000 years old, you know?

Many documents from 2000 years ago exist. None exist from Moses' time.


According to a man with a political agenda, people with political agendas turned a prominent political figure in, handing him over to the local ruling representative. Do you see where I'm going?

Not really!

Edit: prime example of said politics: http://www.usatoday.com/news/religio...06-judas_x.htm

Hardly relevant

Edit continued: If you reject the old testament, you should also reject most of the texts you throw at me here. If you don't reject either, you're more than welcome to start a theological debate on matters you can't even read in the original language.

Ah, so you are fluent in Greek. Have a look at this, then
Γίνεται δὲ κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν χρόνον Ἰησοῦς σοφὸς ἀνήρ, εἴγε ἄνδρα αὐτὸν λÎ*γειν χρή: ἦν γὰρ παραδόξων ἔργων ποιητής, διδάσκαλος ἀνθρώπων τῶν ἡδονῇ τἀληθῆ δεχομÎ*νων, καὶ πολλοὺς μὲν Ἰουδαίους, πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ τοῦ Ἑλληνικοῦ ἐπηγάγετο: ὁ χριστὸς οὗτος ἦν. καὶ αὐτὸν ἐνδείξει τῶν πρώτων ἀνδρῶν παρ᾽ ἡμῖν σταυρῷ ἐπιτετιμηκότος Î*ιλάτου οὐκ ἐπαύσαντο οἱ τὸ πρῶτον ἀγαπήσαντες: ἐφάνη γὰρ αὐτοῖς τρίτην ἔχων ἡμÎ*ραν πάλιν ζῶν τῶν θείων προφητῶν ταῦτά τε καὶ ἄλλα μυρία περὶ αὐτοῦ θαυμάσια εἰρηκότων. εἰς ἔτι τε νῦν τῶν Χριστιανῶν ἀπὸ τοῦδε á½*νομασμÎ*νον οὐκ ἐπÎ*λιπε τὸ φῦλον.

Don't forget that most writings of that era were in Greek. The earliest examples of the NT are in Greek. I have little doubt that some of the originals were in Greek. Luke and Saul of Tarsus (whose nickname, Paul or Î*άυλος, meaning little in Greek) certainly were Greek-speakers/writers. Jesus' reputed pun on Peter being the rock of the church is valid in Greek (Î*Î*τρος), although I have little doubt that their common language was Aramaic.

And so a futile argument continues. I have the intimate conviction that killing people is wrong under all circumstances. You believe in murder and mayhem. Amen

[Umfriend]

Not that I (particularly like to) agree with TX, Brian, but you did introduce the bible as (divine) basis for morality.