Conference yukon::christian_v7

I'm currently going through training put on by the
local Crisis Pregnancy Center and the first session
was last night.

There are two standards today by which we (as a society)
measure human life.  One asks what the value of human
life is.  The other asks what the worth of human life is.

The first standard says that relevant questions include:

 - how productive is the person
 - what deformities does the person have
 - what does the person look like
 - what does the person think (if he/she does think)

The second standard says that the only relevant question is

  What worth has God placed on this person?

As we went through the material, it occurred to me that
Jesus died for each one of us, regardless of our physical/
emotional/spiritual/mental state or abilities.  This
includes the unborn, the deformed, the elderly, etc.  He
paid the price of a perfect life because He valued each
one of these more important than His own life.

Collis

    Recently a woman who is not in this conference, confided in me a deep
    anger and resentment towards her husband.  She said, as a Christian
    wife, how can I love this man who constantly criticizes me at every
    turn?  
    
    My response to her was, *she* couldn't.  She said, then how do you
    expect me to be submissive and loving, if I can't.  I asked her to
    think about this for a moment, 
    
    When your husband walk through that door and he begins to criticize,
    you need to ask yourself this, "If he (the husband) had been the only
    person on this earth, would Jesus have died for him?"  When pain and
    hurt comes into a relationship, it is very difficult to separate
    ourselves from that pain and truly seek God's love to flow through us. 
    When I was married, and my alcoholic husband, literally verbally and
    physically abused me, the only love that I found for him, was God's
    love flowing through me.  *I* did not love him anymore, that last black
    eye took care of that.  
    
    But I soon began to see my husband through the eyes of God and knew
    that God loved him enough to die for him.  That changed my life.  I
    could hate his sin, but love him.  You know hate the sin, love the sinner.
    
    Oh well, off track somewhat.. but in conclusion, the value of human
    life or worth that counts, is through the eyes and heart of God.
    
    Echo... did I hear echo... :-)
    
    Nancy

�                             -< value?  or worth. >-

� The second standard says that the only relevant question is
�  What worth has God placed on this person?

I believe that we also have to consider who we belong to.  Who made the 
very material of which we exist.  How long will we 'possess' these bodies.  
In Whose image are they made?  These point to accountability to God; not a 
mere objective materialistic / humanistic valuation.

 "...for your lifeblood I will surely demand an accounting. ..." Genesis 9:5

 "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; ,for in 
  the image of God has God made man."  Genesis 9:6

A solemn reminder that stealing what is God's (the life of another) demands 
justice, forfeiting the life which would blaspheme His holy image...

He made His children as we are to glorify Him.  Some with steeper slopes to
climb, to attain greater heights of glory.  Others to learn the less
exacting blessings of creation bestowed upon us; but each with his place to
fill as living stones. 

Collis, loved your para on Jesus' valuation of us.  Exactly right on.


							love
								Andrew

           Man, from reading note 62 & replies, if people can't agree on
           when life begins or ends; it all depends on somebody's
           personal "choice" and as long as it doesn't hurt anyone
           else... all this stuff makes me sick!!!  God help us!!!
           
           I just received reply to my letter to President Clinton which
           asked him not to lift the ban on fetal tissue research.  Well,
           he said as I expected that this research can help people, etc,
           etc.  He also said he's pro-choice but not pro-abortion,
           either.  He will only get the message if more people pray as
           well as write or call him.  He probably thinks pro-life people
           are a small minority of "fundmentalists" who follow Pat
           Robertson & Jerry Falwell.  Well, we have to prove him wrong.
           Keep those cards & letters going in.
           
           Steve

    .0  You forgot - except in the case of war or capital punishment, and
    then, life has no sanctity.
    

>    .0  You forgot - except in the case of war or capital punishment, and
>    then, life has no sanctity.

Richard,
  You forgot that sometimes people go to war to preserve life, even at
the cost of [another's] life, and that capital punishment is *punishment*
for not sanctifying life.

Mark

    The problems I have with capital punishment are:

    1. The state is a poor minister of justice. I don't want to give 
       the authority to kill people to a system that makes as many
       mistakes. Our system in the U.S. makes lots of mistakes and
       there is a different opportunity to justice for the rich and the 
       poor. The poor would die more often than the rich. 

    2. Mistakes. Often innocent people are convicted. With capital 
       punishment there is no recourse once the falsely accused is dead.
       Jesus died under a government with capital punishment.

    3. There is no chance for the convicted to repent to God once he is
       dead. Even murderers should have a chance to repentant and avoid 
       eternity in hell. St. Paul repented for persecuting Christians. 
       Everyone should be given the chance and not just because they know
       their life is about to end.

    4. Capital punishment is not a deterrent. People mostly kill with the 
       idea they won't get caught. In fact with capital punishment 
       the criminal is more desperate to get away with his crime and will
       take more lives in order to avoid being captured and put to death.

    Just some of my reasons.
     
    Peace
     Jim

>    The problems I have with capital punishment are:


Noted, Jim.  Not to take away your convictions, but to offer the balanced
thought:

1)  Though the state *may be* a poor minister of justice (and in this
    amoral governmental society I agree!), this is not a reason to be
    against the principle of capital punishment if it was ministered
    properly, judiciously, (and if you weren't on the receiving end).

2)  Mistakes are an extension of a poor minister of justice.  Again,
    we speak of a flaw in the minister and not in the message (of justice).

3)  Convicted persons who are to be punished have opportunity to repent.
    Opporunity for *ALL* of us is NOW.  No one know whether they will
    arrive home safe and sound tonight.  We have probabilities, but 
    no guarantees.

4)  A deterrent: I've heard both opinions.  Regardless of whether it *DETERS*
    crimes is not NECESSARILY reason for punishment by death; it may be a
    "side-benefit" in that if the consequences do deter someone, then it
    has been a deterrant.  But whether or not it deters someone has little
    bearing on the matter of justice and a just penalty, judiciously ministered,
    equally without regard to person, and with certainty.

Mark

    .3  Doubletalk.
    

You should know.  You started it in .2

re:5

>1)  Though the state *may be* a poor minister of justice (and in this
>    amoral governmental society I agree!), this is not a reason to be
>    against the principle of capital punishment if it was ministered
>    properly, judiciously, (and if you weren't on the receiving end).

     There is no perfect human system of justice and never will be.
     Only God is the perfect judge.

>2)  Mistakes are an extension of a poor minister of justice.  Again,
>    we speak of a flaw in the minister and not in the message (of justice).

     Same as above. Humans will never be perfect ministers if justice.

>3)  Convicted persons who are to be punished have opportunity to repent.
>    Opporunity for *ALL* of us is NOW.  No one know whether they will
>    arrive home safe and sound tonight.  We have probabilities, but 
>    no guarantees.

    They do if they believe in God. Not everyone believes in God even at
    the hour of their death. Such people are in risk of eternal punishment
    in hell. I would rather keep the person alive until God determines when 
    its his time.

>4)  A deterrent: I've heard both opinions.  Regardless of whether it *DETERS*
>    crimes is not NECESSARILY reason for punishment by death; it may be a
>    "side-benefit" in that if the consequences do deter someone, then it
>    has been a deterrant.  But whether or not it deters someone has little
>    bearing on the matter of justice and a just penalty, judiciously ministered,
>    equally without regard to person, and with certainty.

    Then is the purpose of capital punishment revenge ? 

    Jim

Let's leave the ability to mete out justice for a moment and concentrate on
these points, Jim.  Then we'll come back to these.

>    They do if they believe in God. Not everyone believes in God even at
>    the hour of their death. Such people are in risk of eternal punishment
>    in hell. I would rather keep the person alive until God determines when 
>    its his time.
and
>    Then is the purpose of capital punishment revenge ? 

Justice is not revenge.  We can debate what justice is, and that would be
another discussion; especially whether the ultimate punishment (death) is
really necessary or indeed just.

The death penalty is the price society places on certain crimes.
Someone glibly coined "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime."
This glibness speaks of a "case and effect."  In programming terms,
we have an if-then-else clause.  Actions, responsibility, culpability,
all are factors in determining the consequences, natural or imposed.

If one commits a wrong against another, our society has punishments
for those wrongs.  Remember your last speeding ticket?  You might
argue rightly that you were driving safely and that it is an injustice
for you to pay a fine.  Is the purpose of the ticket revenge?  Nope.
Is it a deterrent?  Sometimes.  I daresay you watched your odometer
the next time you went driving.

"Ah," you say, "a person who will suffer the death penalty has no 'next time.'"

True, and we also see that severity of crime calls for more than reprimand.
In America today, receiving captial punishment takes years, must be crimes
of really henious nature, etc.  (In most cases.  I say this because I agree
that there are mistakes that good checks and balances would probably avoid.)

>I would rather keep the person alive until God determines when its his time.

God is the Absolute Authority and delegate authority under him.  It says
in the Bible that all governments (that means Nebuchadnezzar, Stalin, 
Mao, Hitler, Thatcher, Major, Bush, and Clinton) are given authority 
by God's provenient will.  The Bible also has captial punishment on
the books of the Levitical Law.

You can quote, "'Vengence is mine,' saith the Lord." and I hope you
would look up the context.  It is a possibility that God metes out
that vengence through government.

If one is leaning towards the Calvinistic view, the convict about to die
will have the opportunity according to God's election.  And from the
Wesleyan, he also has that choice, albeit a bit shorter on the time
required to choose.  (To a Calvinist, time is of no consequence.)

Now, is it just for society to take one's life, as the result of punishment
for crime or war?  

I think that there are cases where it is just in some cases and further
that it is injustice not to in some cases.

Mark

    As an aside, Chuck Colson reported in one of his Prison Fellowship
    newsletters some time ago that 80% (that's 4 out of 5) prisoners on
    death row convert to Christ.
    
    Bo

    .7, Remarkable.  Thanks for straightening me out.
    
    Blessings to you, anyway, dear Metcalfe.  Your rationalization for
    playing God is the popular one and the dominant one in our society.
    
    

    Gee, glad to be in the majority for once.

    .11> Richard Jones-Christie
    
      As for "playing God," (a snide comment), the authroity that God gives
    to man is not to be abused, but neither is it to be shirked.  Abuse or
    shirking are equally abhorrent.
    
    Mark
    

    .13  You could never be accused of being snide, now could you?
    
    Your pontifications are, as usual, simplistic at best.
    
    Richard
    

    Re: Note 67.4 by PCCAD::RICHARDJ
    
    G'day Jim,
    
>   1. The state is a poor minister of justice. I don't want to give 
>      the authority to kill people to a system that makes as many
>      mistakes. Our system in the U.S. makes lots of mistakes and
>      there is a different opportunity to justice for the rich and the 
>      poor. The poor would die more often than the rich. 
    
    (I haven't read all the replies yet, and someone may have asked the
    very question that I am going to ask, so ignore this question if it has
    been asked...)
    
    Can you quantify the mistakes that are made by your country's legal
    system?  How many "right" judgements were there in the past 50 years
    compared to the number of "wrong" judgements?
    
    I'm in a different country, but down here I think we have a ratio of
    less than 1 in 1000 "wrongs" compared to "rights".
    
    As for the poor versus the rich; yes, I can agree with that.  We have
    the same sort of problem here.  If a person thinks that the judgement
    against them is "wrong", they can appeal if they can afford it.
    
    I think I'd like to see the statistics on the number of appeals that
    reverse the original decision in my country...
    
    James
    (Australia)

    Re: Note 67.10 by ICS::KAUFMANN
    
>   As an aside, Chuck Colson reported in one of his Prison Fellowship
>   newsletters some time ago that 80% (that's 4 out of 5) prisoners on
>   death row convert to Christ.
    
    Aha!  A good way to gain converts?  ;-)
    
    As another aside, when organ transfusion becomes more and more easy,
    eventually people may ask that criminals on "death row" be taken apart
    for spare parts rather than just buried or burned.  Since they are to
    be killed anyway, you don't even have to ask them for permission; since
    they can't answer after they are dead.
    
    Then, after a while, once supply and demand sets in, the death penalty
    will be introduced for less heinous crimes.  Eventually, most crimes
    will have such a penalty.  Reckless driving.  Speeding.  Shoplifting.
    
    I didn't prophesy this, Larry Niven did.  He thought it would come to
    pass in the last 20 years or so.  He was wrong on the timing... ;-)
    
    [and I don't really believe this will happen; I'm just reflecting a
    view that I have read...]
    
    James

>>>    I didn't prophesy this, Larry Niven did.  He thought it would come to
>>>    pass in the last 20 years or so.  He was wrong on the timing... ;-)
    
Niven also predicted (?) the industry in body part "theft" - ie involuntary or 
ill-educated "donors" being killed for organ transplants. The term "organlegger"
was one he coined. If anyone is interested, on e book is titled "The Long Arm 
of Gil Hamilton".

Chele

 

    RE:15
    James, (good name;))

    I don't have statistics on the number of mistakes made. There have
    been T.V reports on the falsely accused and articles which show that
    it is higher than expected. Certainly higher than it should be for
    a system that is going to be given the power to take human life.

     Jim

.14>    Your pontifications are, as usual, simplistic at best.

The best pontifications are simplistic.

>    .13  You could never be accused of being snide, now could you?

I give as good as I get; sometimes better; sometimes worse.
And since you brought it up, what is the reason for this 
once-again occasion to visit this conference, R J-C?

We may not see evidence of your reappearance in the future
because the past, though electronically sketchy, is still 
with us.  

MM

Hi Richard!!!! Long time....!

Forgive me being a bit in catch-up, but why do you maintain in .2 that life 
is deemed to have no sanctity in war and capital punishment?

Surely, the enormity of the sacrifice (of life) is a measure of the 
criticality of the need.

Do you remember in Genesis 4, after Cain killed Abel - the first murder - 
Cain realises that his own life is only as sacred as the one he has 
destroyed.  He is terrified because his own life is forfeit in punishment, 
in verse 14.  Suddenly, he is aware that he has crossed the boundary 
between mans' territory and Gods, and has stolen what belongs to the LORD. 
God is therefore totally within His rights to recall Cain's own life in 
a judgement for which Cain has no defense.

This is the murderer recognising how fully he deserves capital punishment - 
and God deferring its execution.

I doubt if Cain killed anyone else...  But that's only my conjecture.  He 
died eventually, to face God in judgement.

The 'ideal' purpose of both capital punishment and war is to maintain 
righteousness.  If this is not so, then they are applied incorrectly (which 
is almost always the case - inevitably for at least one side of a war).

I hope this is some sort of basis we can at least agree to work from ... 

							Andrew

            re: <<< Note 67.14 by CSC32::J_CHRISTIE "Rise Again!" >>>
    
     Richard,

     > Your pontifications are, as usual, simplistic at best.
    
     So, maybe you'd prefer the more complex pontifications I present?

     Heh, Heh 8^{)

     Brian

re.14

>    Your pontifications are, as usual, simplistic at best.

Whoa! Hold on heah! Don't go bringing Catholicism into this. Let's leave the 
pontiff out of this.

8*)

Ace,
 tsk, tsk.

%^/

    My favored argument against capital punishment is that a rich man
    will never be so punished.
    
    My favored argument for capital punishment is that it is a sure
    way to prevent repeat offenses (a well publicized trial recently
    ended here in Texas where a convicted murderer was paroled only
    to murder again - the whole parole process is being changed for
    capital offenses).
    
    As far as capital punishment not being a deterrent, I have to 
    disagree.  Crime is almost nonexistent in police states with
    harsh penalties.  Examples abound today and throughout history.
    Look at the former Soviet Union.  
    
    Now, getting back to the core topic of the Sanctity of Life, I
    cannot by myself condone the killing/murder/execution of *anyone*.
    I question the ability of flawed humans to hand out such irrevocable 
    punishments.  Such extreme punishments are better left with God.
    Also, execution represents a kind of despair, a complete loss of
    hope, and a lack of faith in the Holy Spirit's ability to work 
    within the heart of a criminal....even if it only happens to one
    in ten.....one in a hundred....one in ?....
    
    I am ever thankful that Christ hasn't given up on me.
    
    Otto

    I know I am writing a reply to myself!  But this "Right On" note is in
    the worng place and I don't know how to get it out. Writing this to
    avoid confusion that may be out there.  Sorry if I am confusing the
    issue further!
    
    

    "What worth has God placed on this person!"
    
    RIGHT ON!
    

    Re: Note 48.22 by PCCAD::RICHARDJ
    
>   James, (good name;))
    
    Gee thanks... ;-)

>   I don't have statistics on the number of mistakes made. There have
>   been T.V reports on the falsely accused and articles which show that
>   it is higher than expected. Certainly higher than it should be for
>   a system that is going to be given the power to take human life.
    
    Any error rate is higher than it should be for such a system; agreed.
    But your government has presumably made a cost/benefit decision on how
    far to go towards perfection...  I was hoping to see how far it has
    gone.
    
    I mistrust the media.  Reports on a justice system are invariably
    negative - good news does not sell.  If a report shows nothing bad, it
    does not get selected by the Editor.
    
    Since there are no hard figures, then, I cannot compare your country to
    mine...  ;-)
    
    James

    
    Hi,
    
    I have seen the question a number of times in notes and in general
    discussion..."Isn't being Pro-life and Pro-capital punishment
    contradictory?"
    
    I am never sure how to answer this question.  I know exactly where I
    stand in the abortion debate (Pro-life), but I honestly have not made
    up my mind about capital punishment.  I was wondering if some of you
    could point me to some scripture references in addition to Gen 9:6 to
    help me in this area.
    
    Thanks in advance,
    
    Paula (who's trying to be scripturally correct, not politically
    correct)
    

    Hi Paula,
    
    Let's see this came up in another topic... if only my brain had a
    search button where I could put in wildcards.. :-) :-)
    
    Lemmeee see what I can do?
    
    $Brain *capitol_punishment
    
    Error unable to locate brain

There's no keyword for it - maybe try a DIR/TITLE="string" or a SEARCH "string"

Pro-life - support for a defenseless human being who cannot make a decision
           for him or herself.

Pro-capital punishment - support of societal law to punish a human being
                         with death for his or her decision to commit a 
                         crime deemed worthy (by society) of the death
                         punishment.

The former involves an innocent person, the latter involves a guilty person.
In a day of relative ethics where right and wrong are either nullified
or swicthed around, people don't want to deal with guilt and innocence.

Do we?

    One problem I have with capital punishment is that the same system that 
    allows the death of defenseless human beings to happen would be the one 
    to carry out death sentences of others. Its seems like you'd be giving a
    murderer a license to kill.

    Jim

Folks, we're missing something rather important thusfar in our discussion.

The only basis for proclaiming an opinion to the world is the Word - PERIOD!

Scripture clearly proclaims that, while we may forgive a murderer, 
forgiveness *IS NOT* the same thing as pardon. In almost *all* circumstances,
only G_d can pardon, as *He* is the one who has proclaimed the consequences
of a specific sin. The civil government is merely acting as his 
representative in instituting and carrying out justice - it is a temporal
metaphor for the eternal reality.

With that in mind, consider the *fact* that G_d's word has proclaimed the 
death penalty (by stoning) for intentional shedding of innocent blood.
It proclaims similar penalties for aiding and abetting murder, too. It 
further ascribes penalties for those who permit shedding of innocent blood,
but take no action to prevent it, though they had no direct hand in the 
murderous act itself.

With these facts in mind, let us reconsider the issues of capital punishment
and fetuscide (the legally correct name for abortion).

According to Scripture, capital punishment is the divinely instituted 
consequence for the shedding of innocent blood, or the aiding or abetting 
thereof. Take your arguements regarding the whether or not you agree with
Scripture to the "By What Premise?" topic, please. Scripture is *very* clear
on this point. Granted it is first declared in the Older Covenant, but 
*no where* in the Newer Covenant is Exodus 20 (etc) *ever* contradicted!
Indeed, in the later portions of the Roman Epistle (12-14) Paul builds quite
a case for the temporal institution of civil government as a divine 
representative for the purpose of overseeing justice and temporal judgement.

Leviticus 21, et al build quite a solid case for the representation of 
fetuscide as the shedding of innocent blood. I don't think that this issue
need be argued extensively in this venue. It's like preaching to the choir.

So, the issue is *not* whether we *feel* warm and fuzzy about capital 
punishment. It is a matter of obedience to G_d's Word. It is *He* who 
proscribed the consequences of specific sins. It is *HE* who has the right
to pardon, or to demand justice. Remember, justice is *not* being extended
on behalf of  the victim (though we might well feel very sorriful and
pitiful toward the victim and his/her family), justice is *not* being
extended on behalf of society (though society might well feel outraged and
indignant at the crime), but justice *IS* being extended on behalf of 
*Almighty G_d*, who is wholely just and remains King of the Universe.

So, like it or not, G_d's Word reigns, and He will honor His Word, *even 
above His Name*!

SMost Sincerely,

Brian

    RE:36
    Brian,
          the Hebrew  leaders of the Old Testament who were faithful
    to God and lived in accordance with God's will, were given this 
    responsibility. 

    I can't believe that pagan governments which are not faithful to 
    God and don't follow his will would be given the same responsibility.

    If capital punishment was justifiable in the eyes of God, it would seem
    to me that it would work. However, history shows that it has not worked
    and many innocent people, including Jesus, were put to death under
    systems of capital punishment.

    Jim

Let's not confuse the principle with the pragmatic.

Society is justified in some cases of capital punishment.
How well society administers justice is another thing
altogether.

(P.S. Brian, no mail, ?)

Jim,

> The Hebrew  leaders of the Old Testament who were faithful to God and
> lived in accordance with God's will, were given this responsibility. 

You must be looking at the lives and faithfulness of the Older Covenant
Hebrew leaders through rose-colored glasses, my friend. For the most part,
they were *anything* but faithful to G_d's Word. That is the reason that
they were so frequently judged and occassionally exiled. Nevertheless, they
*were* given the responsibility, and were judged for the (lack of )
faithfulness in carrying it out.

> I can't believe that pagan governments which are not faithful to God and
> don't follow his will would be given the same responsibility.


Your willingness to believe what G_d's Word says does not change its 
veracity one little bit. Romans 12-14 in quite clear on the matter of the
responsibilities of (pagan) civil governments and Believers' responsibility
toward the same.

> If capital punishment was justifiable in the eyes of God, it would seem
> to me that it would work.

It *does* work. It is a completely effective judgement against the offender,
absolutely equitable to the offense committed. The judgement is final, 
complete and equitable. What problem do you have with the nature of the 
consequence?

> However, history shows that it has not worked and many innocent people,
> including Jesus, were put to death under systems of capital punishment.

The fallability of the human operation of a divinely initiated system of 
justice does not speak to the validity of the justice, but to the 
credibility of the human implementation. Divine justice is perfect, and is
perfectly and completely represented in the Word. Many checks and balances
are defined in the Word to help insure that justice is carried out equitably.
The failure is on the part of the human implementors to follow G_d's 
prescription for implementation, *not* on the prescribed consequences.
To attempt to discredit divine justice based on faulty human implementation
is both fallacious and (self-)deceiving.

Brian

I'm coming in a bit late on this one, but capital punishment is addressed
in note 167.  There's only 5 replies there - so far ... 

And I've started adding some keywords.  I used to put a lot on in previous
versions, but thought that I was the only one to use them, so stopped ;-} 


								Andrew

Spurious notes moved to chitchat, anticipating next week's purge.

								Andrew
								co-mod