Battle Talk ~ BR XI

[theLawRocks]

Where's the Ding-Ding

Where's the Ding-Ding

Knight:

Where's the DING-DING-DING. Oh no! :shocked: Turbo your post was late. (Excellent though. :up:

What is going to happen! ... Oh, All is Good.. theo will forgive you Turbo.

But WAIT. With this flagrant violation of the law, what will others in the RING do. How will this effect Battle Royal LXV.

My world is crumbling.

I got it --- Turbo repent, ask for forgiveness. Theo will forgive you ( but claim victory :doh: ).

I forgive you too. But that is irrelevant.

All is WELL. The battle continues…….

But Knight, you're in trouble (Proverbs 17:15)!

 

[Sharri]

Short answer... no.

You cannot forgive someone else's debt. If my neighbor steals my friends lawnmower I have no right to forgive him of the debt he owes my friend.

We (as a people) profaned God by not executing this murderer painfully and swiftly.

Thanks Knight


Turbo made great comments in his debate about forgiveness.

 

[Turbo]

Turbo,
I read with interest your latest installment on the debate. And although you make some good points, I fail to see a connect between the cross of Christ and what you are trying to say. Do you just uphold the OT law as was given to Israel? Do you think ALL OT capital crimes are still punishible by death?

I already responded to this in my round 2 post, under the heading Rightly Dividing.

How would YOU deal with non-capital offences?

How did God instruct Israel to deal with non-capital offences? Do you know?

 

[Delmar]

2. This debate is not entirely about governments. Turbo continually speaks of the right of the government to do such a thing (I will address that even further). This is irrelevant to the debate. I will remind him that the title of this debate is: “Capital Punishment: Should Christians support the Death Penalty?” Not, Capital Punishment: What is the Government’s role? I am pointing out the distinction because they are entirely different questions. So far, Turbo is only supplying answers to the second, irrelevant question and not stating why Christians should support the DP. I will explain this further in a moment.

Actually, I've been saying that it is not only the government's right, but its duty.

On the other hand, individual civilians (whether they are Christians or not) do not have the right to punish criminals themselves (Romans 12:19). But they should advocate that governments do their God-given duty.

This is entirely relevant to the debate topic, which is "Should Christians support the Death Penalty?" not "Should Christians take it upon themselves to administer the Death Penalty?" As I explained in round 2, Paul is quite clear that we should not avenge ourselves, but that we should "give place to [God's] wrath" (Romans 12:19) which He has delegated to governing authorities to carry out, calling them "God’s minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil," who "does not bear the sword in vain" (Romans 13:4).

:up: This is what I have been wanting to say for two days! How hard is it to see that a Christian should want the government to do the job that God gave it to do? In fact, most Christians would rather the government busy itself with the jobs that the Church and the family are supposed to do!

 

[Turbo]

If any of you have seen or read Les Miserables than it should shine some light on the situation. Jean Valjean is a convicted criminal who did 20 years. He is on parol and is taken in by a monk. He steals from the monk, and when caught and taken to the monk, the monk forgives him and has mercy on him. Valjean wasn't taken to prision and instead the Monk told him to change into a new man. Valjean did just that. Javert, an inspector, isn't convinced that anyone can change and belives that he must take Valjean in, since he is a convict. Here we have one many living by grace and another by the law. In the end, Javery realizes that he had no mercy and only followed the rules. He clapsed his arms in chains and dropped into a river to his death.

Something to ponder. Or make fun of, since that is a common thread on this forum.

People do not despise a thief
If he steals to satisfy himself when he is starving.
Yet when he is found, he must restore sevenfold;
He may have to give up all the substance of his house. Proverbs 6:30-31​

The story of Les Miserables highlights the unjust nature of prison sentences. In a moment of desparation, Jean Valjean broke a window to steal a loaf of bread for his starving niece, and for that he ended up spending 20 years in prison. Then he was paroled and forced to carry papers that let everyone know he was a criminal, which assured that virtually no one would be willing to hire him to do business with him. (The papers ensured that people would despise this man who stole bread to satisfy his starving niece). The only way he could make an honest living was by breaking parole, at which point he became a fugitive once more. His crime this time was that he didn't tell everyone that he had committed a petty crime 20 years ago, and for that the French government sought to imprison him again.

Jean Valjean should have never been imprisoned to begin with. His punishment was unbiblical and unjust. Jean Valjean should have been made to pay the shopkeep for the window he broke plus sevenfold the value of the bread.

"The Law" which Javert upheld was not from God, but from man.

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Les Miserables is French. :flamer:

Need I say more???

 

[Nathon Detroit]

Knight:

Where's the DING-DING-DING. Oh no! :shocked: Turbo your post was late. (Excellent though. :up:

What is going to happen! ... Oh, All is Good.. theo will forgive you Turbo.

But WAIT. With this flagrant violation of the law, what will others in the RING do. How will this effect Battle Royal LXV.

My world is crumbling.

I got it --- Turbo repent, ask for forgiveness. Theo will forgive you ( but claim victory :doh: ).

I forgive you too. But that is irrelevant.

All is WELL. The battle continues…….

But Knight, you're in trouble (Proverbs 17:15)!

Both Theo and Turbo were late in posting their 3rd round posts and both had good reason so all is "good".

 

[Stripe]

turbo hit the nail on the head when he suggested theo may not have read the post before responding.

theo obviously does read turbos post but he probably read it and then just answered the questions as listed at the bottom without having accumulated why the questions were asked.

 

[Wamba]

Les Miserables is French. :flamer:

Need I say more???

:darwinsm: :up:

 

[novice]

Don't ya hate it when you are having a great conversation and then you make a post and the other party ignores it and vanishes into thin air????

I hate that. :madmad:

Theo? Primghar?

Let me re-post....

That is not true. If your 16-year-old son stole money from you, you would forgive him. But you would still make him give the money back and possibly take away his license for a week or make him clean the house or something, but you have still forgiven him for his wrong.

I think it's rather obvious you do not understand what forgiveness means.

What you have described above is my son "paying the price" for his disobedience.

You have confused restitution with forgiveness.

It seems to me you and Theo are attempting to redefine forgiveness. Let ask you something... do you believe that you need to add anything to the forgiveness that Jesus offers on the cross? Do you need to "give the money back", "clean the house" or have your license "taken away" (to borrow from your analogy above)?

Do you believe that to attain forgiveness you need to not only repent but to pay restitution?

I do not believe people should be given the death penalty; I believe they should be forgiven and punished--but not executed. I am not sure why that is so difficult to understand.

It's difficult for you to explain because you are forced to alter the meaning of the word forgiveness to make your point.

What you describe as forgiveness... is actually restitution.

 

[Eisley]

If Turbo would stop talking about imprisonment, which has nothing to do with the debate, and does not prove a point for the death penalty, maybe he would still have a case....maybe....

 

[Mr. 5020]

If Turbo would stop talking about imprisonment, which has nothing to do with the debate, and does not prove a point for the death penalty, maybe he would still have a case....maybe....

:squint:

 

[Eisley]

Wow, I'm not sure I should have joined this thread. Some of you are really sadistic. Why do you celebrate death in your avatars when Christ's message surely celebrates life?

 

[Delmar]

If Turbo would stop talking about imprisonment, which has nothing to do with the debate, and does not prove a point for the death penalty, maybe he would still have a case....maybe....

Turbo has explained the connection more than once, but let me have at it one more time.

Theo claims that the DP does not apply because Christ paid the price and we do not need to be punished! If that is true we should not be punished for anything, ever!

 

[Eisley]

And Theo has said over and over that he believes there is a difference between punishment and condemnation. Christ paid the penalty so we need not be condemned, our sinful lives demand consequences with every breath....this is Sunday School stuff...

 

[Turbo]

And Theo has said over and over that he believes there is a difference between punishment and condemnation. Christ paid the penalty so we need not be condemned, our sinful lives demand consequences with every breath....this is Sunday School stuff...

The death penalty is punishment for committing certain crimes. Receiving the death penalty does not necessarily mean that one is condemned to hell.

Sure, sometimes people use the word condemned in association with the death penalty, but people say "condemned to life in prison" too. People even use "condemnation" as a synonym of "rebuke" at times. Words have a range of meaning.

 

[theo_victis]

Sure, sometimes people use the word condemned in association with the death penalty, but people say "condemned to life in prison" too. People even use "condemnation" as a synonym of "rebuke" at times. Words have a range of meaning.

hehehe... condemned to life... you just made that up!!!!

 

[Lighthouse]

And Theo has said over and over that he believes there is a difference between punishment and condemnation. Christ paid the penalty so we need not be condemned, our sinful lives demand consequences with every breath....this is Sunday School stuff...

The condemnation Christ paid for is the condemnation of not being with Him for eternity. Not for the condemnation of physical death, which we all suffer anyway. Nor was it for the condemnation of punishment for crimes committed, when it comes to the legal side of things. Christ did not die for our crimes, He only died for our sins. He died to save us from eternal damnation, not to abolish the death penalty.

And seeing as how many prisoners end up worse when they are released, than when they went in, and even some end up staying longer because of the things they've gone on to do in prison, imprisonment is not working. If someone commits a crime not worthy of capital punishment, they should at least be flogged.

 

[Lighthouse]

hehehe... condemned to life... you just made that up!!!!

No he didn't.

 

[Delmar]

And Theo has said over and over that he believes there is a difference between punishment and condemnation. Christ paid the penalty so we need not be condemned, our sinful lives demand consequences with every breath....this is Sunday School stuff...

That is true! The government putting you to death does not condemn you...to Hell! BTW Sunday School is supposed to teach from the Bible!