Get E-Mail Updates

God's Politics Blog

Executions Worldwide Nearly Doubled in 2008

by Rose Marie Berger 07-10-2009 | 3:00pm
Print
34 Comments | Login or Register to post comments

The number of executions worldwide nearly doubled last year compared with 2007, according to a study released in March by Amnesty International.

At the same time, Europe and Central Asia have become virtually death penalty-free zones, with only Belarus still maintaining capital punishment. The United States is the only country in the Americas that consistently executes, but the number of executions in 2008 was the lowest since 1995.

In response to these convicting statistics (see Global Death Penalty, Sojourners, July 2009), Marie Dennis, co-president of Pax Christi International, the world's largest Catholic peace organization, told Sojourners:

I am concerned about the increase in executions because it reflects a loss of respect for the basic dignity of every human life. It represents a failure to believe in the possibility of reform and reconciliation, a failure to recognize the injustice and inadequacies of our justice system, and a misguided belief in the deterrence effect of the death penalty.

I hope people of faith will respond to the increased use of capital punishment around the world by deepening our commitment to the gift of each person's life. We need to nurture relationships with people who have been victims of violent crime as well as with people who are on death row and probe our own experiences of reconciliation. It is time for all people of faith to advocate for social and racial justice and for an end to the death penalty.

I appreciate Marie's perspective. I also appreciate that of arch-conservative -- and also a Catholic -- Richard A. Viguerie who wrote When Governments Kill in the same issue of Sojourners. Using the rigors of Catholic social teaching, both these Catholics come to the same inevitable conclusion-the death penalty is wrong and unacceptable for Christians to support in any way, shape, or form.

The U.S. is slowly retreating from capital punishment -- it's barbaric, ineffective, and very expensive. Christians can use this political and economic moment to light a fire for the end of capital punishment in the United States. It's time for this country to also be counted among those civilized nations who are considered a "death penalty-free zone."

Rose Marie Berger, an associate editor at Sojourners, blogs at www.rosemarieberger.com.

34 Comments | Login or Register to post comments
Sojourners relies on the support of readers like you to sustain our message and ministry.

Related Stories

Resources

Like what you're reading? Get Sojourners E-Mail updates!

by: WaveTossed

07-12-2009 @ 12:02am

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 11:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 3:30pm

Capital punishment is simply wrong. Jesus said: Mathew Chapter 5:

"38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also."

Jesus refuted the entire idea of "an eye for an eye." And that's basically the principle that capital punishment is founded on -- the idea that two wrongs makes a right. Not true.

The other problem with capital punishment is the fact that sometimes innocent people are executed. If even one "mistake" is made and even just one innocent person is executed, that would violate the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not do murder."

by: 1Grace

07-10-2009 @ 4:10pm

I have come around to the side of this debate that capital punishment is un useful in our culture and criminal system . I do have problems with allowing people to walk free after 10 or 15 years and have committed a heinous murder.

But your scripture use in this argument is out of context . The eye for an eye scripture was not intended for revenge . I believe you lost the meaning of what the Lord was telling us . The Old testament tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to inject justice , not revenge . Say i stole your stereo , back then you may hit me over the head with a club because you found out I stole from you , possibly killing me . The tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to lessen the degree of punishment in many instances , People often dealt on punsihment with emotion and revenge , the eye for an eye scripture was meant to limit that punishment to fit the crime .

Jesus was dealing with folks who used religion as a means to control people , the religious big shots were using scripture to control people and requireing a commitment from them that they could not deliever . Jesus one uped them and did the sdame to them . " Got to love that Guy" its why i really have a problem using scripture in my own life to tell another what to do , I can see how it will influence your ideas , but I believe scripture is meant for us to use and determine issues like this , which I believe will lead you to being against the death penalty . But I am open to differing views,. .

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 6:20pm

The death penalty is supported in both Old and New Testaments (Numbers and Acts examples). The messed up legal system needs to be fixed, but the fundamental question of imposing the death penalty is supported by Scripture.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 6:40pm

1Grace is correct in that Scripture is frequently open to interpretation (or else mis-interpretation). However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments.

I'm Episcopalian. The Episcopal church is opposed to the death penalty. http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/...

And an update, even stronger opposition:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/1866_70079_ENG_H...

From the U.S. Catholic Bishops site, quoting John-Paul II. I don't believe that Pope Benedict has overruled his predecessor:

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty...

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 7:44pm

There are issues in Scripture where different interpretations butt heads, but the position of Scripture on many issues, including this issue is clear. Scripture is the plumb line. The points of view of various churches, denominations or people on this or other issues must be evaluated in light of Scripture. Acts 17:11 makes this very point.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 3:48am

"However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments. "

I do see your point , but also the same point can be said if one murderer is allowed to go free and murder again , using your religious arguement that would be also breaking the ten commandments.

And hammerud what scripture are you saying supports the death penalty . The death penalty was used , in the Old testament I agree was used . But remember Jesus told us to hate in our hearts was committing murder , we do not execute a person for hating right ?

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:20am

I agree with the legal system being messed up . In my state we had a person who was sentenced to death for a gruesome murder. Over ten years on death row, the man gained so much weight his lawyers argued it would be cruel and unusual punishment if he was hanged . ??????

In our state you can choose lethal injection or hanging . He chose hanging . In any case he won on appeal , He had a list of appeals .

In any case I would question the new testament supported the death penalty , as i would question the New testament saying it was wrong .
The argument I hear against the death penalty is the sanctity of life , and no one but God has the right to end a life. Which I believe is a good point , not sure its the only thing to consider however .Biblically not protecting those around you also is promoting the sanctity of life .
Those who are pro life for lives unborn have a moral consistency that i respect , however I am somewhat confused by pro choice voices that are against the death penalty . If they were told we should compromise and work to wards less convictions and the reasons people murder I think they would not get the hypocrisy .

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 1:35pm

How much more clearer can Scripture be?

Exodus 20:13

"13 Thou shalt not kill."

Killing an innocent person, even by the State is a clear violation of Scripture.

I believe that the Episcopal Church and the Roman Catholic Church understood this in their opposition to the death penalty. When even one innocent person is killed, it is a violation of the Ten Commandments.

Now this doesn't mean that a convicted murderer should go scott-free. Nobody is saying that. It's not a choice between execution and just letting murderers go scott-free. Convicted murderers should get life sentences without parole. And not in a "country-club" prison either. There is plenty of work that prisoners can do while serving their sentences. And if it turns out that a conviction was done in error, at least the person can be exonerated and set free and compensated for the error. However, once an innocent person is executed than he/she has been murdered by the state and cannot be brought back to life.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:14pm

What would you call it when an innocent person gets a life sentence ?
is that any less of a sin by the state ? Just playing with you , I do see your point , but its an isolated one and when you look at the over all picture one I believe should be part of the conversation but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice .

Also what i have against the death penalty now is it seems if you have money , or even still the right race , you have a better chance of escaping the death sentence . Till we get a better system that looks out for victims and protects potential victims , the death penalty appears to be something that is not useful in this culture.

The Catholic Church Bibi cal arguments are the same for protecting the unborn. man should not destroy what God has made. Makes more sense to an Evangelical like myself understanding of the scripture . The Catholic church uses the sacredness of life as their main focus , different then the Ten Commandment logic. And as I said , Jesus said we are all murderers who have ill feelings toward another .

the fact is also that as many people who have to deal with the fact a loved one was murdered, a child at times , must have the hardest trial concerning this . Their ill will towards the murderer being seen as bad as the murderer himself in the eyes of God . Their ability to forgive is the message I get from all of this , forgive those who do such things , but what to do with those who do commit such crimes from a society standpoint should be to make sure they never do it again.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 3:30pm

Capital punishment is simply wrong. Jesus said: Mathew Chapter 5:

"38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also."

Jesus refuted the entire idea of "an eye for an eye." And that's basically the principle that capital punishment is founded on -- the idea that two wrongs makes a right. Not true.

The other problem with capital punishment is the fact that sometimes innocent people are executed. If even one "mistake" is made and even just one innocent person is executed, that would violate the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not do murder."

by: 1Grace

07-10-2009 @ 4:10pm

I have come around to the side of this debate that capital punishment is un useful in our culture and criminal system . I do have problems with allowing people to walk free after 10 or 15 years and have committed a heinous murder.

But your scripture use in this argument is out of context . The eye for an eye scripture was not intended for revenge . I believe you lost the meaning of what the Lord was telling us . The Old testament tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to inject justice , not revenge . Say i stole your stereo , back then you may hit me over the head with a club because you found out I stole from you , possibly killing me . The tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to lessen the degree of punishment in many instances , People often dealt on punsihment with emotion and revenge , the eye for an eye scripture was meant to limit that punishment to fit the crime .

Jesus was dealing with folks who used religion as a means to control people , the religious big shots were using scripture to control people and requireing a commitment from them that they could not deliever . Jesus one uped them and did the sdame to them . " Got to love that Guy" its why i really have a problem using scripture in my own life to tell another what to do , I can see how it will influence your ideas , but I believe scripture is meant for us to use and determine issues like this , which I believe will lead you to being against the death penalty . But I am open to differing views,. .

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 6:20pm

The death penalty is supported in both Old and New Testaments (Numbers and Acts examples). The messed up legal system needs to be fixed, but the fundamental question of imposing the death penalty is supported by Scripture.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 6:40pm

1Grace is correct in that Scripture is frequently open to interpretation (or else mis-interpretation). However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments.

I'm Episcopalian. The Episcopal church is opposed to the death penalty. http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/...

And an update, even stronger opposition:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/1866_70079_ENG_H...

From the U.S. Catholic Bishops site, quoting John-Paul II. I don't believe that Pope Benedict has overruled his predecessor:

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty...

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 7:44pm

There are issues in Scripture where different interpretations butt heads, but the position of Scripture on many issues, including this issue is clear. Scripture is the plumb line. The points of view of various churches, denominations or people on this or other issues must be evaluated in light of Scripture. Acts 17:11 makes this very point.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 3:48am

"However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments. "

I do see your point , but also the same point can be said if one murderer is allowed to go free and murder again , using your religious arguement that would be also breaking the ten commandments.

And hammerud what scripture are you saying supports the death penalty . The death penalty was used , in the Old testament I agree was used . But remember Jesus told us to hate in our hearts was committing murder , we do not execute a person for hating right ?

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:20am

I agree with the legal system being messed up . In my state we had a person who was sentenced to death for a gruesome murder. Over ten years on death row, the man gained so much weight his lawyers argued it would be cruel and unusual punishment if he was hanged . ??????

In our state you can choose lethal injection or hanging . He chose hanging . In any case he won on appeal , He had a list of appeals .

In any case I would question the new testament supported the death penalty , as i would question the New testament saying it was wrong .
The argument I hear against the death penalty is the sanctity of life , and no one but God has the right to end a life. Which I believe is a good point , not sure its the only thing to consider however .Biblically not protecting those around you also is promoting the sanctity of life .
Those who are pro life for lives unborn have a moral consistency that i respect , however I am somewhat confused by pro choice voices that are against the death penalty . If they were told we should compromise and work to wards less convictions and the reasons people murder I think they would not get the hypocrisy .

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 1:35pm

How much more clearer can Scripture be?

Exodus 20:13

"13 Thou shalt not kill."

Killing an innocent person, even by the State is a clear violation of Scripture.

I believe that the Episcopal Church and the Roman Catholic Church understood this in their opposition to the death penalty. When even one innocent person is killed, it is a violation of the Ten Commandments.

Now this doesn't mean that a convicted murderer should go scott-free. Nobody is saying that. It's not a choice between execution and just letting murderers go scott-free. Convicted murderers should get life sentences without parole. And not in a "country-club" prison either. There is plenty of work that prisoners can do while serving their sentences. And if it turns out that a conviction was done in error, at least the person can be exonerated and set free and compensated for the error. However, once an innocent person is executed than he/she has been murdered by the state and cannot be brought back to life.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:14pm

What would you call it when an innocent person gets a life sentence ?
is that any less of a sin by the state ? Just playing with you , I do see your point , but its an isolated one and when you look at the over all picture one I believe should be part of the conversation but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice .

Also what i have against the death penalty now is it seems if you have money , or even still the right race , you have a better chance of escaping the death sentence . Till we get a better system that looks out for victims and protects potential victims , the death penalty appears to be something that is not useful in this culture.

The Catholic Church Bibi cal arguments are the same for protecting the unborn. man should not destroy what God has made. Makes more sense to an Evangelical like myself understanding of the scripture . The Catholic church uses the sacredness of life as their main focus , different then the Ten Commandment logic. And as I said , Jesus said we are all murderers who have ill feelings toward another .

the fact is also that as many people who have to deal with the fact a loved one was murdered, a child at times , must have the hardest trial concerning this . Their ill will towards the murderer being seen as bad as the murderer himself in the eyes of God . Their ability to forgive is the message I get from all of this , forgive those who do such things , but what to do with those who do commit such crimes from a society standpoint should be to make sure they never do it again.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 9:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 10:02pm

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 9:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 10:02pm

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-12-2009 @ 12:02am

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 11:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

Comments sorted by highest rated. After voting you must refresh your page to see the sort order change.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 3:30pm

Capital punishment is simply wrong. Jesus said: Mathew Chapter 5:

"38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also."

Jesus refuted the entire idea of "an eye for an eye." And that's basically the principle that capital punishment is founded on -- the idea that two wrongs makes a right. Not true.

The other problem with capital punishment is the fact that sometimes innocent people are executed. If even one "mistake" is made and even just one innocent person is executed, that would violate the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not do murder."

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 3:30pm

Capital punishment is simply wrong. Jesus said: Mathew Chapter 5:

"38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also. 40 And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also."

Jesus refuted the entire idea of "an eye for an eye." And that's basically the principle that capital punishment is founded on -- the idea that two wrongs makes a right. Not true.

The other problem with capital punishment is the fact that sometimes innocent people are executed. If even one "mistake" is made and even just one innocent person is executed, that would violate the Ten Commandments: "Thou shalt not do murder."

by: 1Grace

07-10-2009 @ 4:10pm

I have come around to the side of this debate that capital punishment is un useful in our culture and criminal system . I do have problems with allowing people to walk free after 10 or 15 years and have committed a heinous murder.

But your scripture use in this argument is out of context . The eye for an eye scripture was not intended for revenge . I believe you lost the meaning of what the Lord was telling us . The Old testament tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to inject justice , not revenge . Say i stole your stereo , back then you may hit me over the head with a club because you found out I stole from you , possibly killing me . The tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to lessen the degree of punishment in many instances , People often dealt on punsihment with emotion and revenge , the eye for an eye scripture was meant to limit that punishment to fit the crime .

Jesus was dealing with folks who used religion as a means to control people , the religious big shots were using scripture to control people and requireing a commitment from them that they could not deliever . Jesus one uped them and did the sdame to them . " Got to love that Guy" its why i really have a problem using scripture in my own life to tell another what to do , I can see how it will influence your ideas , but I believe scripture is meant for us to use and determine issues like this , which I believe will lead you to being against the death penalty . But I am open to differing views,. .

by: 1Grace

07-10-2009 @ 4:10pm

I have come around to the side of this debate that capital punishment is un useful in our culture and criminal system . I do have problems with allowing people to walk free after 10 or 15 years and have committed a heinous murder.

But your scripture use in this argument is out of context . The eye for an eye scripture was not intended for revenge . I believe you lost the meaning of what the Lord was telling us . The Old testament tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to inject justice , not revenge . Say i stole your stereo , back then you may hit me over the head with a club because you found out I stole from you , possibly killing me . The tooth for a tooth concept was actually meant to lessen the degree of punishment in many instances , People often dealt on punsihment with emotion and revenge , the eye for an eye scripture was meant to limit that punishment to fit the crime .

Jesus was dealing with folks who used religion as a means to control people , the religious big shots were using scripture to control people and requireing a commitment from them that they could not deliever . Jesus one uped them and did the sdame to them . " Got to love that Guy" its why i really have a problem using scripture in my own life to tell another what to do , I can see how it will influence your ideas , but I believe scripture is meant for us to use and determine issues like this , which I believe will lead you to being against the death penalty . But I am open to differing views,. .

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 6:20pm

The death penalty is supported in both Old and New Testaments (Numbers and Acts examples). The messed up legal system needs to be fixed, but the fundamental question of imposing the death penalty is supported by Scripture.

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 6:20pm

The death penalty is supported in both Old and New Testaments (Numbers and Acts examples). The messed up legal system needs to be fixed, but the fundamental question of imposing the death penalty is supported by Scripture.

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 6:40pm

1Grace is correct in that Scripture is frequently open to interpretation (or else mis-interpretation). However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments.

I'm Episcopalian. The Episcopal church is opposed to the death penalty. http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/...

And an update, even stronger opposition:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/1866_70079_ENG_H...

From the U.S. Catholic Bishops site, quoting John-Paul II. I don't believe that Pope Benedict has overruled his predecessor:

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty...

by: WaveTossed

07-10-2009 @ 6:40pm

1Grace is correct in that Scripture is frequently open to interpretation (or else mis-interpretation). However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments.

I'm Episcopalian. The Episcopal church is opposed to the death penalty. http://www.deathpenaltyreligious.org/education/...

And an update, even stronger opposition:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/1866_70079_ENG_H...

From the U.S. Catholic Bishops site, quoting John-Paul II. I don't believe that Pope Benedict has overruled his predecessor:

http://www.usccb.org/sdwp/national/deathpenalty...

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 7:44pm

There are issues in Scripture where different interpretations butt heads, but the position of Scripture on many issues, including this issue is clear. Scripture is the plumb line. The points of view of various churches, denominations or people on this or other issues must be evaluated in light of Scripture. Acts 17:11 makes this very point.

by: hammerud

07-10-2009 @ 7:44pm

There are issues in Scripture where different interpretations butt heads, but the position of Scripture on many issues, including this issue is clear. Scripture is the plumb line. The points of view of various churches, denominations or people on this or other issues must be evaluated in light of Scripture. Acts 17:11 makes this very point.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 3:48am

"However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments. "

I do see your point , but also the same point can be said if one murderer is allowed to go free and murder again , using your religious arguement that would be also breaking the ten commandments.

And hammerud what scripture are you saying supports the death penalty . The death penalty was used , in the Old testament I agree was used . But remember Jesus told us to hate in our hearts was committing murder , we do not execute a person for hating right ?

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 3:48am

"However, my biggest problem is if even one innocent person were executed, that would be a sin, against the Ten Commandments. "

I do see your point , but also the same point can be said if one murderer is allowed to go free and murder again , using your religious arguement that would be also breaking the ten commandments.

And hammerud what scripture are you saying supports the death penalty . The death penalty was used , in the Old testament I agree was used . But remember Jesus told us to hate in our hearts was committing murder , we do not execute a person for hating right ?

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:20am

I agree with the legal system being messed up . In my state we had a person who was sentenced to death for a gruesome murder. Over ten years on death row, the man gained so much weight his lawyers argued it would be cruel and unusual punishment if he was hanged . ??????

In our state you can choose lethal injection or hanging . He chose hanging . In any case he won on appeal , He had a list of appeals .

In any case I would question the new testament supported the death penalty , as i would question the New testament saying it was wrong .
The argument I hear against the death penalty is the sanctity of life , and no one but God has the right to end a life. Which I believe is a good point , not sure its the only thing to consider however .Biblically not protecting those around you also is promoting the sanctity of life .
Those who are pro life for lives unborn have a moral consistency that i respect , however I am somewhat confused by pro choice voices that are against the death penalty . If they were told we should compromise and work to wards less convictions and the reasons people murder I think they would not get the hypocrisy .

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:20am

I agree with the legal system being messed up . In my state we had a person who was sentenced to death for a gruesome murder. Over ten years on death row, the man gained so much weight his lawyers argued it would be cruel and unusual punishment if he was hanged . ??????

In our state you can choose lethal injection or hanging . He chose hanging . In any case he won on appeal , He had a list of appeals .

In any case I would question the new testament supported the death penalty , as i would question the New testament saying it was wrong .
The argument I hear against the death penalty is the sanctity of life , and no one but God has the right to end a life. Which I believe is a good point , not sure its the only thing to consider however .Biblically not protecting those around you also is promoting the sanctity of life .
Those who are pro life for lives unborn have a moral consistency that i respect , however I am somewhat confused by pro choice voices that are against the death penalty . If they were told we should compromise and work to wards less convictions and the reasons people murder I think they would not get the hypocrisy .

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 1:35pm

How much more clearer can Scripture be?

Exodus 20:13

"13 Thou shalt not kill."

Killing an innocent person, even by the State is a clear violation of Scripture.

I believe that the Episcopal Church and the Roman Catholic Church understood this in their opposition to the death penalty. When even one innocent person is killed, it is a violation of the Ten Commandments.

Now this doesn't mean that a convicted murderer should go scott-free. Nobody is saying that. It's not a choice between execution and just letting murderers go scott-free. Convicted murderers should get life sentences without parole. And not in a "country-club" prison either. There is plenty of work that prisoners can do while serving their sentences. And if it turns out that a conviction was done in error, at least the person can be exonerated and set free and compensated for the error. However, once an innocent person is executed than he/she has been murdered by the state and cannot be brought back to life.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 1:35pm

How much more clearer can Scripture be?

Exodus 20:13

"13 Thou shalt not kill."

Killing an innocent person, even by the State is a clear violation of Scripture.

I believe that the Episcopal Church and the Roman Catholic Church understood this in their opposition to the death penalty. When even one innocent person is killed, it is a violation of the Ten Commandments.

Now this doesn't mean that a convicted murderer should go scott-free. Nobody is saying that. It's not a choice between execution and just letting murderers go scott-free. Convicted murderers should get life sentences without parole. And not in a "country-club" prison either. There is plenty of work that prisoners can do while serving their sentences. And if it turns out that a conviction was done in error, at least the person can be exonerated and set free and compensated for the error. However, once an innocent person is executed than he/she has been murdered by the state and cannot be brought back to life.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:14pm

What would you call it when an innocent person gets a life sentence ?
is that any less of a sin by the state ? Just playing with you , I do see your point , but its an isolated one and when you look at the over all picture one I believe should be part of the conversation but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice .

Also what i have against the death penalty now is it seems if you have money , or even still the right race , you have a better chance of escaping the death sentence . Till we get a better system that looks out for victims and protects potential victims , the death penalty appears to be something that is not useful in this culture.

The Catholic Church Bibi cal arguments are the same for protecting the unborn. man should not destroy what God has made. Makes more sense to an Evangelical like myself understanding of the scripture . The Catholic church uses the sacredness of life as their main focus , different then the Ten Commandment logic. And as I said , Jesus said we are all murderers who have ill feelings toward another .

the fact is also that as many people who have to deal with the fact a loved one was murdered, a child at times , must have the hardest trial concerning this . Their ill will towards the murderer being seen as bad as the murderer himself in the eyes of God . Their ability to forgive is the message I get from all of this , forgive those who do such things , but what to do with those who do commit such crimes from a society standpoint should be to make sure they never do it again.

by: 1Grace

07-11-2009 @ 4:14pm

What would you call it when an innocent person gets a life sentence ?
is that any less of a sin by the state ? Just playing with you , I do see your point , but its an isolated one and when you look at the over all picture one I believe should be part of the conversation but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice .

Also what i have against the death penalty now is it seems if you have money , or even still the right race , you have a better chance of escaping the death sentence . Till we get a better system that looks out for victims and protects potential victims , the death penalty appears to be something that is not useful in this culture.

The Catholic Church Bibi cal arguments are the same for protecting the unborn. man should not destroy what God has made. Makes more sense to an Evangelical like myself understanding of the scripture . The Catholic church uses the sacredness of life as their main focus , different then the Ten Commandment logic. And as I said , Jesus said we are all murderers who have ill feelings toward another .

the fact is also that as many people who have to deal with the fact a loved one was murdered, a child at times , must have the hardest trial concerning this . Their ill will towards the murderer being seen as bad as the murderer himself in the eyes of God . Their ability to forgive is the message I get from all of this , forgive those who do such things , but what to do with those who do commit such crimes from a society standpoint should be to make sure they never do it again.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 9:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 9:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 9:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 10:02pm

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 10:02pm

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:46pm

Numbers 35:16,17 -- one OT example.
Affirmed by Paul by inference in Acts 25:11, 25 NT example.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: hammerud

07-11-2009 @ 11:51pm

The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder. Murders are to be executed. The shedding of innocent blood is an abomination to God, but murders do not fit into that category.

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 11:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: WaveTossed

07-11-2009 @ 11:58pm

"but how many people have committed murder , served time , been released and murdered again . How many have murdered , sent to prison and murdered while in prison . Those statistics and aspect of the conversation should be brought into the conversation , for the sake of justice."

I agree. But these are failures of the justice system. And you are correct: the more money a defendant has (and the whiter his skin is), the less likely this defendant will be executed. The killing of even one innocent person by the state is a bigger failure of the justice system.

And you are correct. If you are pro-life, then you must be completely pro-life. This is what Catholic Bishops refer to as "the seamless garment."

by: WaveTossed

07-12-2009 @ 12:02am

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.

by: WaveTossed

07-12-2009 @ 12:02am

"The context of "Thou shalt not kill" has to do with murder."

Absolutely. Many modern translations translate this Commandment as "Thou shalt not murder." Which is correct.

The execution of even one innocent person is a murder, an abomination before God, and a violation of His Commandments. If human beings were God or equivilent to God -- and thus could be perfect and guarantee that no innocent people would ever be executed -- then perhaps this conversation might be different. However, human beings can never be God and thus human mistake will come in sooner or later. For the state to allow human mistakes to result in the killing of even one innocent human being: this is murder and a violation of God's Commandments.