Today, my pastor said that he knows of no place in scripture where God commands men to punish criminals by locking them up. He commands execution, lashes, fines, restitution, and even dismemberment in one situation - where a woman grabs a man by his testicles, but it appears that confinement in jail is never commanded or even suggested. Of course Jesus mentioned prisoners and jails, but doesn't appear to advocate them. My pastor believes that many more criminals should be executed than have been. He also mentioned how well "caning" works as a crime deterrent in some countries. This, I assume, would be similar to lashes.
Any thoughts?
Dwight
What is the best penal system?
Re: What is the best penal system?
My problem with a penal system is its lack of hope for true rehabilitation or taking the person's lot into account.
The young black kid who grew up in the ghetto without a father, is jumped into a gang at age 12 because its either that or be a victim, then commits a crime and just does the time. Not only that, but is placed into a prison which deepens his gang affiliation because its run with your gang or get killed. Then he is released and is placed back into the situation he left.
The justice system is interested in simply instituting equal punishment relative to the crime, unconcerned about considering the lot of the individual criminal or improving the individual. It is an eye-for-an-eye institution.
I was listening to the local talk radio last week, and the host was speaking to the parents of a murdered child. They wanted their child's killer sentenced to death simply because they believed they would get some satisfaction from seeing him killed. There was no care to reach him, see him change. To me, this is the perfect example of the penal system - infliction without concern of rehabilitation.
I do not believe the harshness of punishment is how the Christian is to deter crime, but through love is supposed to reach the heart.
I remember Christ Kyle's father speaking of how relieved he was when his son's killer was found guilty, and how he just wanted to jump over the railings in court and choke his son's killer to death. This is a typical conservative "Christian" family saying this - they are relieved because their son's killer was "getting his" and they'd be happy to dish it out themselves.
I would believe as a Christian I would see my son's killer as a hurting person, and I would want nothing more than to jump the railing, hug him and tell him I love him, and ask the court to let me take him and care for him.
Those are my liberal leaning, rambling thoughts. Lol
The young black kid who grew up in the ghetto without a father, is jumped into a gang at age 12 because its either that or be a victim, then commits a crime and just does the time. Not only that, but is placed into a prison which deepens his gang affiliation because its run with your gang or get killed. Then he is released and is placed back into the situation he left.
The justice system is interested in simply instituting equal punishment relative to the crime, unconcerned about considering the lot of the individual criminal or improving the individual. It is an eye-for-an-eye institution.
I was listening to the local talk radio last week, and the host was speaking to the parents of a murdered child. They wanted their child's killer sentenced to death simply because they believed they would get some satisfaction from seeing him killed. There was no care to reach him, see him change. To me, this is the perfect example of the penal system - infliction without concern of rehabilitation.
I do not believe the harshness of punishment is how the Christian is to deter crime, but through love is supposed to reach the heart.
I remember Christ Kyle's father speaking of how relieved he was when his son's killer was found guilty, and how he just wanted to jump over the railings in court and choke his son's killer to death. This is a typical conservative "Christian" family saying this - they are relieved because their son's killer was "getting his" and they'd be happy to dish it out themselves.
I would believe as a Christian I would see my son's killer as a hurting person, and I would want nothing more than to jump the railing, hug him and tell him I love him, and ask the court to let me take him and care for him.
Those are my liberal leaning, rambling thoughts. Lol
-
dwight92070
- Posts: 1550
- Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2011 12:09 am
Re: What is the best penal system?
"Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man." Genesis 9:6 If my son was murdered, yes, I would want the killer executed. Of course, there could be extenuating circumstances. Obviously, it may not always be 1st degree murder. Does this mean I have no concern for the murderer's soul? No, I would hope that I would even be willing to talk to him about his eternal destiny, and that he would be saved before his execution. But we can't let our compassion for the lost cloud our vision of justice on this earth. Without justice, crime runs rampant. That is why I favor a little time between the crime and the execution, so they will have time to repent and get right with God. And yes, I guess they would have to be in jail during that time, or else they could run and escape justice. I think what my pastor is saying is, "Don't give them decades behind bars, but either execute them quickly, or whip their backs, or fine them, have them work it off, and let them go." It seems that this is really "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" mentality, and isn't that true justice, even now when God's grace is available through Christ? The problem in our country is there is often years or decades between the crime and the punishment. This does not deter crime, it encourages it.
By the way, a friend of mine says that Jesus did away with stoning as a means of execution with the incident of the woman caught in adultery. I never really came to that conclusion. Stoning would have been a just sentence in that case, but Jesus chose to show her mercy. But does this mean that we should forego ALL capital punishment and show mercy in every case? We might as well throw out all justice and allow crime to run rampant.
Dwight
By the way, a friend of mine says that Jesus did away with stoning as a means of execution with the incident of the woman caught in adultery. I never really came to that conclusion. Stoning would have been a just sentence in that case, but Jesus chose to show her mercy. But does this mean that we should forego ALL capital punishment and show mercy in every case? We might as well throw out all justice and allow crime to run rampant.
Dwight
Re: What is the best penal system?
Jesus did not address the criminal justice system. In fact, when asked to intervene in a legal case, He said, "Man, who made me a judge or an arbitrator over you?" (Luke 12:14). This does not mean that Jesus had no opinions about criminal justice. He simply made no effort to address it, or to modify it. Jesus told His disciples to be forgiving of their persecutors, but He gave no similar command to the magistrates as to the execution of criminal penalties. The New Testament, as well as the Old, recognizes the divine mandate upon magistrates to punish criminals in the public interest (Rom.13:1-7; 1 Peter 2:13-14; Acts 25:11).
Jesus did not say whether the penalties prescribed by Moses should be reduced, increased, or left unaltered. Since He affirmed the law of Moses so frequently (including the death penalty—Mark 7:10), one might conclude that He, like Paul (Rom.7:12), was satisfied with its justice. One of the participants here thinks that it is telling that Jesus "never killed anybody in His lifetime," and that this tells us that Jesus opposed the mosaic criminal penalties. This makes as much sense as saying that I never killed anybody, and that this proves that I oppose the mosaic penalties.
Death is a tragedy. Jesus wept about it at the tomb of Lazarus, and was tempted to shrink from it in the Garden of Gethsemane. However, the Bible treats death as inevitable (unless we are living at the time of the rapture). No one wants to die, or wants their loved ones to die, at any given time. The fact remains that physical death is inevitable, and there is no reason to believe that Jesus wished to immediately put an end to it. In fact, He told His followers that they should be prepared to embrace it, when the time comes (Matt.16:25; cf., Rev.12:11; John 18:11).
Some deaths are very unjust. Other are justified. Whether a man's death is justified or not, the results are the same: The man prepared to meet God will always benefit through death (Phil.1:21, 23), whereas the man unprepared to meet Him will die tragically. We must be opposed, in principle, to all unjust deaths (along with every other injustice). However, unsavory as death may be, we cannot object, in principle, to just deaths. Justice is always good for mankind, and is in God's interests, however severe. When we neglect justice, out of boundless compassion, we endanger society, which is anything but a compassionate thing to do.
Should we prefer lifelong imprisonment to the just execution of deserving criminals? Execution, in itself, does not prevent repentance—and may even provide incentive for it. The question is justice. If a man deserves to die, but the magistrates continue to support his life in the prison system, we must ask, at whose expense is this man being supported? Obviously, it is at the expense of society—specifically the tax-payers. This means that, the very society that was victimized by the criminal's original crime, continues to be victimized by being made to pay for the upkeep of the same criminal for the rest of his life.
We who are forbidden to feed a fellow Christian who will not work (2 Thess.3:10), are then made to feed and support the unproductive life of a felon who does no work for the rest of his life. If this is a biblical ethic, it extends more generosity to the murderer, who is to be supported without employment for the rest of his life, than to a Christian brother who prefers not to work, but must not be similarly supported. This strikes me as an inconsistent, poorly thought-out ethic taylor-made for the unthinking sentimentalist.
If I were to commit a capital crime. I (like Paul—Acts 25:11) would not object to dying. My Christian conscience would require me to accept death sooner than to accept the grudging sponsorship of my life in prison by innocent citizens —thus continuing to steal from them with every free meal I eat in their custody. But then, I am a bit of a purist with regard to receiving underserved money from involuntary donors. I also would not accept government welfare or healthcare.
Jesus did not say whether the penalties prescribed by Moses should be reduced, increased, or left unaltered. Since He affirmed the law of Moses so frequently (including the death penalty—Mark 7:10), one might conclude that He, like Paul (Rom.7:12), was satisfied with its justice. One of the participants here thinks that it is telling that Jesus "never killed anybody in His lifetime," and that this tells us that Jesus opposed the mosaic criminal penalties. This makes as much sense as saying that I never killed anybody, and that this proves that I oppose the mosaic penalties.
Death is a tragedy. Jesus wept about it at the tomb of Lazarus, and was tempted to shrink from it in the Garden of Gethsemane. However, the Bible treats death as inevitable (unless we are living at the time of the rapture). No one wants to die, or wants their loved ones to die, at any given time. The fact remains that physical death is inevitable, and there is no reason to believe that Jesus wished to immediately put an end to it. In fact, He told His followers that they should be prepared to embrace it, when the time comes (Matt.16:25; cf., Rev.12:11; John 18:11).
Some deaths are very unjust. Other are justified. Whether a man's death is justified or not, the results are the same: The man prepared to meet God will always benefit through death (Phil.1:21, 23), whereas the man unprepared to meet Him will die tragically. We must be opposed, in principle, to all unjust deaths (along with every other injustice). However, unsavory as death may be, we cannot object, in principle, to just deaths. Justice is always good for mankind, and is in God's interests, however severe. When we neglect justice, out of boundless compassion, we endanger society, which is anything but a compassionate thing to do.
Should we prefer lifelong imprisonment to the just execution of deserving criminals? Execution, in itself, does not prevent repentance—and may even provide incentive for it. The question is justice. If a man deserves to die, but the magistrates continue to support his life in the prison system, we must ask, at whose expense is this man being supported? Obviously, it is at the expense of society—specifically the tax-payers. This means that, the very society that was victimized by the criminal's original crime, continues to be victimized by being made to pay for the upkeep of the same criminal for the rest of his life.
We who are forbidden to feed a fellow Christian who will not work (2 Thess.3:10), are then made to feed and support the unproductive life of a felon who does no work for the rest of his life. If this is a biblical ethic, it extends more generosity to the murderer, who is to be supported without employment for the rest of his life, than to a Christian brother who prefers not to work, but must not be similarly supported. This strikes me as an inconsistent, poorly thought-out ethic taylor-made for the unthinking sentimentalist.
If I were to commit a capital crime. I (like Paul—Acts 25:11) would not object to dying. My Christian conscience would require me to accept death sooner than to accept the grudging sponsorship of my life in prison by innocent citizens —thus continuing to steal from them with every free meal I eat in their custody. But then, I am a bit of a purist with regard to receiving underserved money from involuntary donors. I also would not accept government welfare or healthcare.
Re: What is the best penal system?
Dwight & Steve,
You both seemed to focus on the death penalty aspect of the penal system. I do accept the use of the death penalty, although not with the uncaring heart it is served with towards the criminal.
My attempt was to answer the greater question at large in the subject which is, "What is the best penal system?"
In your replies, including the author of the question, it appears you narrowed down the entire penal system to defense of the death penalty. Or the death penalty vs. life sentence.
That fine, the best penal system can include the death penalty, but there is a bigger picture. Do you believe in mandatory minimums? Three strikes laws? Gen-pop incarceration where gangs are allowed to run the show because that best balances the "yard" power and keeps the peace?
It seems there is a whole spectrum of the penal system which neither of you touched on, that of the typical sentence (death and life sentences are the minority sentences) which lasts from a few months to many years.
Those races serving these sentences are proportionate to those who commit the crimes I believe, but disproportionate to the racial balance of society. Between the majority whites and minority blacks, blacks commit more crime. Why? Because ethics tells that in the absence of character models, one does not have the opportunity to become as virtuous. Thus, the destruction of the black family has left generations and generations of children setup for failure. Our current justice system takes these role model-less criminals and tosses them away for a set time into another system where they lack models of character, then releases them back into the same problematic area which spawned them, leaving them unchanged.
Do you not believe there should be a different method in the penal system? Perhaps a feeling system that can show mercy and love to a young offender for the first time who never experienced such from the hard streets?
Obviously I do, although I do not know what it would look like perfectly. I thought that's what the thread would be about more than just the death penalty.
In my previous post, my problem I expressed was with a "cold" penal system looking to satisfy the victim's and the state's desire for retribution, but withdrawn from effecting change in the offender.
The death penalty can be part of the "best" penal system, but it is only a minimum piece of the system.
Maybe you would have the system be like Dwight's pastor? Even harsher?
I might be ok with that. A canning in an afternoon seems like it could work better then sending the offender away for 2 years into the prison yard gang influence.
Perhaps punishment can get harsher, but the system can have more softness (mercy) built in?
I don't know, thought that's the bigger picture we were going to focus on by the sound of the thread's subject line.
You both seemed to focus on the death penalty aspect of the penal system. I do accept the use of the death penalty, although not with the uncaring heart it is served with towards the criminal.
My attempt was to answer the greater question at large in the subject which is, "What is the best penal system?"
In your replies, including the author of the question, it appears you narrowed down the entire penal system to defense of the death penalty. Or the death penalty vs. life sentence.
That fine, the best penal system can include the death penalty, but there is a bigger picture. Do you believe in mandatory minimums? Three strikes laws? Gen-pop incarceration where gangs are allowed to run the show because that best balances the "yard" power and keeps the peace?
It seems there is a whole spectrum of the penal system which neither of you touched on, that of the typical sentence (death and life sentences are the minority sentences) which lasts from a few months to many years.
Those races serving these sentences are proportionate to those who commit the crimes I believe, but disproportionate to the racial balance of society. Between the majority whites and minority blacks, blacks commit more crime. Why? Because ethics tells that in the absence of character models, one does not have the opportunity to become as virtuous. Thus, the destruction of the black family has left generations and generations of children setup for failure. Our current justice system takes these role model-less criminals and tosses them away for a set time into another system where they lack models of character, then releases them back into the same problematic area which spawned them, leaving them unchanged.
Do you not believe there should be a different method in the penal system? Perhaps a feeling system that can show mercy and love to a young offender for the first time who never experienced such from the hard streets?
Obviously I do, although I do not know what it would look like perfectly. I thought that's what the thread would be about more than just the death penalty.
In my previous post, my problem I expressed was with a "cold" penal system looking to satisfy the victim's and the state's desire for retribution, but withdrawn from effecting change in the offender.
The death penalty can be part of the "best" penal system, but it is only a minimum piece of the system.
Maybe you would have the system be like Dwight's pastor? Even harsher?
I might be ok with that. A canning in an afternoon seems like it could work better then sending the offender away for 2 years into the prison yard gang influence.
Perhaps punishment can get harsher, but the system can have more softness (mercy) built in?
I don't know, thought that's the bigger picture we were going to focus on by the sound of the thread's subject line.
-
Singalphile
- Posts: 903
- Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2012 12:46 pm
Re: What is the best penal system?
After brief thought, I'd argue that imprisonment is not a good way for governments to carry out justice and punishment. Israel was apparently not instructed to do it. It arguably makes matters worse by wasting time and resources. I don't see why a painful, but not permanently debilitating, physical punishment should be considered more cruel than 1or 2 years of idle lockup with dangerous or hardened criminals. Even dismemberment, as horrible as that sounds to me, could be a better option than 10-20 years in a prison environment.dwight92070 wrote:Today, my pastor said that he knows of no place in scripture where God commands men to punish criminals by locking them up. He commands execution, lashes, fines, restitution, and even dismemberment in one situation - where a woman grabs a man by his testicles, but it appears that confinement in jail is never commanded or even suggested. Of course Jesus mentioned prisoners and jails, but doesn't appear to advocate them. My pastor believes that many more criminals should be executed than have been. He also mentioned how well "caning" works as a crime deterrent in some countries. This, I assume, would be similar to lashes.
Any thoughts?
I don't know what the best penal system would be. I would say that it should be focused on being sufficiently harsh so that crime is deterred and on being carried out impartially (obviously) and quickly. That might mean more recent criminals out on "the streets", and most people probably prefer them behind bars. Understandable. Perhaps repeat criminals would have to be imprisoned. Either that, or they'd need to be physically impaired or else executed.
My thoughts.
... that all may honor the Son just as they honor the Father. John 5:23
Re: What is the best penal system?
I don't believe there should be a penal system at all. I believe there should be a restorative system. My signature statement expresses my belief about this. The administration of penalties is man's way of dealing with violence or atrocities of various kinds. Correction and restoration is God's way.
There is a move in both U.S.A. away from punitive justice and toward restorative justice. Those supporting restorative justice do NOT suggest that criminals should be permitted to carry on their evil acts with no ramifications. They may need to be imprisoned to keep them from repeating their crimes. But promoters of restorative justice do advise that criminals should be helped to face up to their evil acts, and not merely be punished for them. Mere punishment doesn't work, and frequently results in the repetition of the crimes and atrocities commited. With restorative justice, the criminal must face his victim (if still alive) or the victim's family (if not), and come to a place of remorse and repentance. The criminal need to be changed, not killed.
As for the woman taken in adultery, this is a good example of how Jesus dealt with a situation of which under the Mosaic law she would have stoned her to death. I think to differentiate between Jesus' position concerning his personal acts concerning wrongdoing and his ideal for legislation concerning harmful acts, is artificial at best (though we know little or nothing about the latter).
When Jesus asked his disciples to love and pray for their enemies, and do good toward them, He didn't suggest that it was all right to bring a law suit against them to have them killed.
Howard Zehr, a Christian and son of a Mennonite minister, wrote a powerful book describing restorative justice. In one chapter, he contrasts Covenant justice, the Biblical alternative, with contemporary justice. The final paragraph in this chapter follows:
Changing Lenses
There is a move in both U.S.A. away from punitive justice and toward restorative justice. Those supporting restorative justice do NOT suggest that criminals should be permitted to carry on their evil acts with no ramifications. They may need to be imprisoned to keep them from repeating their crimes. But promoters of restorative justice do advise that criminals should be helped to face up to their evil acts, and not merely be punished for them. Mere punishment doesn't work, and frequently results in the repetition of the crimes and atrocities commited. With restorative justice, the criminal must face his victim (if still alive) or the victim's family (if not), and come to a place of remorse and repentance. The criminal need to be changed, not killed.
As for the woman taken in adultery, this is a good example of how Jesus dealt with a situation of which under the Mosaic law she would have stoned her to death. I think to differentiate between Jesus' position concerning his personal acts concerning wrongdoing and his ideal for legislation concerning harmful acts, is artificial at best (though we know little or nothing about the latter).
When Jesus asked his disciples to love and pray for their enemies, and do good toward them, He didn't suggest that it was all right to bring a law suit against them to have them killed.
Howard Zehr, a Christian and son of a Mennonite minister, wrote a powerful book describing restorative justice. In one chapter, he contrasts Covenant justice, the Biblical alternative, with contemporary justice. The final paragraph in this chapter follows:
Zehr's book is available at Amazon, and you can look into it and read parts of it free online:Whether the thrust of the Bible is on retribution or restoration is not a marginal issue. The question is at the heart of our understandings about the nature of God and about the nature of God's actions in history. It is not an issue which Christians can avoid.
Changing Lenses
Paidion
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Man judges a person by his past deeds, and administers penalties for his wrongdoing. God judges a person by his present character, and disciplines him that he may become righteous.
Avatar shows me at 75 years old. I am now 83.
Re: What is the best penal system?
Strange, do you know any person who does not differentiate between conduct in personal relationships with neighbors, on the one hand, and the duties of a judge at his bench, on the other? Doesn't every thinking person make such a distinction? Why should Jesus be though to be different from other thinking people?I think to differentiate between Jesus' position concerning his personal acts concerning wrongdoing and his ideal for legislation concerning harmful acts, is artificial at best
It is clear that Jesus never addressed magistrates, telling them how to do their job—though he had occasion to address a king, a governor, a supreme court justice, and more than one military officer. As the greatest moral teacher ever to walk the earth, wouldn't you expect Him to instruct them, if he believed it His mission to change the penal system?
Re: What is the best penal system?
Steve, do believe a Christian can actively participate in the penal system? Say, specifically working as an executioner?steve wrote: As the greatest moral teacher ever to walk the earth, wouldn't you expect Him to instruct them, if he believed it His mission to change the penal system?
Re: What is the best penal system?
''My problem with a penal system is its lack of hope for true rehabilitation or taking the person's lot into account.''
Thank you Jaydam and Paidion for your thoughtful posts, exploring the heart of God in this matter. I am very disturbed at the cold calculated way in which people use scripture to fly in the face of the Sermon on the Mount, and completely disregard the families of many of our prisoners, many of whom would do very well and be helped on the road to true rehabilitation by being put to work rather than warehoused in front of a TV where drugs, rape and violence abound. So many young offenders are put in these places where they can hardly do anything but become worse.
I have read many books by prisoners and their families - in fact, we have a good friend who was on death row for strangling his best friend in a drug deal when he was 19. His life was like that of the 'young black kid' Jaydam spoke of. Of course, many people who believe they are following the Lord would wish him dead, but after thirty years of being honed in this hell, he has become a most beautiful humble person, married to a dear woman. They are good friends to many people. He is out of prison for five years now and doing well. We rejoice for him and his family who love him and prayed for him the whole time.
Most who write in favor of imposing the Law of Moses in this day sound very ''...unconcerned about considering the lot of the individual criminal or improving the individual. It is an eye-for-an-eye institution.'' Very well put!
One thing I have learned is that many families of murder victims find that after the execution of the murderer, they do NOT feel better. They do NOT have closure. But many of the courageous families who reach out to the murderer of their loved ones grow in grace beyond anything they ever dreamed they would do.
Capital punishment is cold calculated murder by the State. It destroys opportunity for healing for the victim's family; it destroys hope for the murderer, for his family and the community, and when it turns out that the executed one was actually innocent, all hell breaks loose in way too many people's hearts.
As for caning? The rebellious child says, “Didn't hurt”, and goes about his evil ways as before. I know; I was spanked. Dismemberment - you speak of it so easily - it rolls around your tongue like a fine wine. Exactly what part of his body would you dismember, and by the way, here is the ax so you can have the joy of doing it yourself? How about his hand so he cannot work, or wash his body, or prepare food... his leg so he cannot walk? Only a fool thinks he can teach nonviolence through violence.
I was so disturbed by a writing in another thread on this topic that I cried all through church this morning, sitting with families of the Anabaptist tradition, whose ancestors received with joy the plundering of their goods - who learned about the love of God through decades of being hounded like animals through the mountains of Europe, and loving their enemies in return. The love of these people is a palpable presence when you come into their presence. I have never heard of one crime committed by any of these people.
Will it take the arrival of ISIS (and Sharia Law - very similar to the Law of Moses) to America to humble us to the point we will begin to love like Jesus?
Thank you Jaydam and Paidion for your thoughtful posts, exploring the heart of God in this matter. I am very disturbed at the cold calculated way in which people use scripture to fly in the face of the Sermon on the Mount, and completely disregard the families of many of our prisoners, many of whom would do very well and be helped on the road to true rehabilitation by being put to work rather than warehoused in front of a TV where drugs, rape and violence abound. So many young offenders are put in these places where they can hardly do anything but become worse.
I have read many books by prisoners and their families - in fact, we have a good friend who was on death row for strangling his best friend in a drug deal when he was 19. His life was like that of the 'young black kid' Jaydam spoke of. Of course, many people who believe they are following the Lord would wish him dead, but after thirty years of being honed in this hell, he has become a most beautiful humble person, married to a dear woman. They are good friends to many people. He is out of prison for five years now and doing well. We rejoice for him and his family who love him and prayed for him the whole time.
Most who write in favor of imposing the Law of Moses in this day sound very ''...unconcerned about considering the lot of the individual criminal or improving the individual. It is an eye-for-an-eye institution.'' Very well put!
One thing I have learned is that many families of murder victims find that after the execution of the murderer, they do NOT feel better. They do NOT have closure. But many of the courageous families who reach out to the murderer of their loved ones grow in grace beyond anything they ever dreamed they would do.
Capital punishment is cold calculated murder by the State. It destroys opportunity for healing for the victim's family; it destroys hope for the murderer, for his family and the community, and when it turns out that the executed one was actually innocent, all hell breaks loose in way too many people's hearts.
As for caning? The rebellious child says, “Didn't hurt”, and goes about his evil ways as before. I know; I was spanked. Dismemberment - you speak of it so easily - it rolls around your tongue like a fine wine. Exactly what part of his body would you dismember, and by the way, here is the ax so you can have the joy of doing it yourself? How about his hand so he cannot work, or wash his body, or prepare food... his leg so he cannot walk? Only a fool thinks he can teach nonviolence through violence.
I was so disturbed by a writing in another thread on this topic that I cried all through church this morning, sitting with families of the Anabaptist tradition, whose ancestors received with joy the plundering of their goods - who learned about the love of God through decades of being hounded like animals through the mountains of Europe, and loving their enemies in return. The love of these people is a palpable presence when you come into their presence. I have never heard of one crime committed by any of these people.
Will it take the arrival of ISIS (and Sharia Law - very similar to the Law of Moses) to America to humble us to the point we will begin to love like Jesus?
"Anything you think you know about God that you can't find in the person of Jesus, you have reason to question.” - anonymous