Pope Rejects God's Word on Death Penalty

[Cruciform]

You don't care for the pope's preferred assumptions and opinions...

Once again, your vast ignorance of the Catholic faith is placed on public display. Nearly all of the teachings of the Catholics Church have been formulated not by the Pope, but by the Magisterium (body of bishops) as a whole. You would know that if you knew anything at all about the Catholic Church.

...taught by his chosen recently-invented...

Someone be sure and notify the Oxford English Dictionary that serpent says that "two millennia ago" now means "recently-invented." :hammer:

...man-made Catholic religion

Your claim that Jesus Christ---who founded his one historic Catholic Church in 33 A.D.---is a mere man, and not also fully divine. :doh:



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

...I will continue to live by His grace and faith, while Cruciform continues to work for his salvation.

Your combined Straw Man and False Dilemma Fallacies are noted.

• First, I do not "work for my salvation" as though I somehow perform good works by my own strength and power---in and of myself and apart from divine grace---so that I can claim salvation as some sort of reward or payment for services rendered. That is decidedly not what Catholics believe or teach. So your claim that I am "working for my salvation" is categorically false.
• Second, what Catholics actually believe and teach is simply that which the apostles also taught, namely, that Christians are moved and enabled by God's grace to engage in acts of obedience which please God and contribute to one's sanctification and, therefore, to his ultimate salvation. This fact is replete in Scripture [source, source].
• Thus, your False Dilemma Fallacy between "grace" and "obedience," as though the two can possibly be separated (see the Epistle of James) is entirely unbiblical and erroneous.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Cruciform]

Pro-Gospel.org

Addressed---and corrected---here, here, here, and here.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[kiwimacahau]

No what's absurd is how the papacy rejects Gods word and instructs his followers to do the same.

Jude 1:7 Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.

You should be warning them not coddling them.

everready

The phrase 'strange flesh' above translates the Greek 'Sarkos Heteras' from which we get the English word 'Heterosexual.' Jude appears to be referring to a legend that the WOMEN of Sodom were chasing after Angels for sex. Moreover Ezekiel (and Jesus) appears to have believed that Sodom was destroyed for the sin of inhospitality to strangers.". . .Behold, this was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy. . .(Ezekiel 16:49 ESV);". . .14"Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. 15"Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. . ." (Matthew 10:14 & 15)

 

[rougueone]

[Pope Rejects God's Word on Death Penalty] linger: "Capital punishment is cruel, inhuman and an offense to the dignity of human life. In today's world, the death penalty is "inadmissible, however serious the crime" that has been committed. That was Pope Francis' unequivocal message to members of the International Commission against the death penalty who met with him in the Vatican. Read more.

[Mike Gendron Comment] The pope is once again deliberately rejecting the supreme authority of God's Word which declares: without ambiguity "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image" (Gen. 9:6)." oly: Pro-Gospel.org

Gen. 9:6 is the Law. Jesus came to free us from the law. And if one is in our Christ-Jesus, then free you are from the law.

43"You have heard that it was said, 'YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR and hate your enemy.' 44"But I say to you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.…

Romans 12:17-21 - Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.

 

[JonahofAkron]

Gen. 9:6 is the Law. Jesus came to free us from the law. And if one is in our Christ-Jesus, then free you are from the law.

Do you have verses that substantiate the claim that Messiah's goal was our freedom from the Law? I suppose you haven't read James.

 

[chrysostom]

it is not often we find someone
who
not only understands what the pope says
but
also what God says
so
why isn't that someone the pope?

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

Pro-Gospel.org

Doesn't this belong in the religious section of this forum?

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

Your combined Straw Man and False Dilemma Fallacies are noted.

• First, I do not "work for my salvation" as though I somehow perform good works by my own strength and power---in and of myself and apart from divine grace---so that I can claim salvation as some sort of reward or payment for services rendered. That is decidedly not what Catholics believe or teach. So your claim that I am "working for my salvation" is categorically false.
• Second, what Catholics actually believe and teach is simply that which the apostles also taught, namely, that Christians are moved and enabled by God's grace to engage in acts of obedience which please God and contribute to one's sanctification and, therefore, to his ultimate salvation. This fact is replete in Scripture [source, source].
• Thus, your False Dilemma Fallacy between "grace" and "obedience," as though the two can possibly be separated (see the Epistle of James) is entirely unbiblical and erroneous.

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

I've had 16 years of Roman Catholic education. That's why I'm a Protestant. You may pick and choose what scriptures or extra scripture documents you wish to adhere to. I have one source, that is God's word in the Bible. Taking scriptures out of context only proves you are a false teacher.

 

[chrysostom]

I've had 18 years of Roman Catholic education. That's why I'm a Protestant.

so I just need two more
and
I will be as smart as you?

 

[Cruciform]

I've had 18 years of Roman Catholic education. That's why I'm a Protestant.

I had forty years of Evangelical Protestant education. That's why I'm a Catholic.

My statements in Post #42 stand precisely as made.

You may pick and choose what scriptures or extra scripture documents you wish to adhere to.

Right back at you.

I have one source, that is God's word in the Bible.

Now go ahead and cite a single biblical text which states that "The Bible is the Christian's only infallible source of divine truth."

Taking scriptures out of context only proves you are a false teacher.

Again, right back at you.



Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[jgarden]

The death penalty is at the heart of the gospel of Jesus Christ (Enyart).

I'm not surprised that the pope said the death penalty is inhuman. He rejects God's word on pretty much every other issue, so why wouldn't the antichrist pope reject the Word about the death penalty?

Pope Rejects God's Word on Death Penalty

I'm not a Catholic but Pope Francis is 101% correct on this one and his critics are demonstrating a shocking lack of knowledge when it comes to the Bible!

1. The OP attempts to justify the death penalty based on the Old Testament - but Paul makes it abundantly clear that if the OT covenant and Mosaic Law were still in effect, then what was the purpose of Christ's crucifixion and resurrection (Galatians 2:21).

2. If the Mosaic Law was still in effect, then all Christian males need to be circumcized - something Paul vehemently opposed.

3. If Christ supported the death penalty, then why didn't He insist that "The Woman Caught in Adultery" (John 8:1-11) be stoned to death- in accordamce with Mosaic Law?

4. By insisting that those without sin should cast the first stone, He saved her life.

5. Christ, who was without sin, did not cast a stone. If Christ's life provides an example for us to follow, then what is the justification for not emulating Him in this case?

6. His challenge still stands - and those who are now insisting that the death penalty be imposed are also asserting that they are without sin.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

so I just need two more
and
I will be as smart as you?

You'll never be as smart as me!!! :think:

 

[HisServant]

[Pope Rejects God's Word on Death Penalty] linger: "Capital punishment is cruel, inhuman and an offense to the dignity of human life. In today's world, the death penalty is "inadmissible, however serious the crime" that has been committed. That was Pope Francis' unequivocal message to members of the International Commission against the death penalty who met with him in the Vatican. Read more.

[Mike Gendron Comment] The pope is once again deliberately rejecting the supreme authority of God's Word which declares: without ambiguity "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image" (Gen. 9:6)." oly: Pro-Gospel.org

In the Pope's defense... the vast majority of death sentences handed down today are not consistent with the burden of proof required in scripture. The scriptures do not allow for circumstantial proof, it is always multiple witnesses.

So it would be consistent with scripture.. God's word... to only support the death penalty if it meets the requirements.

Then you need to look at how a death penalty is applicable in the New Testament... where we are told to love our enemies and forgive 70x7... That would also seem to be inconsistent with capital punishment.

I would go as far as to say that any Christian who desires that someone receive the death penalty is violating the spirit of the New Testament and should examine their motives.


Is it just me? or does anyone else see a re-jewification of Christians going on lately?... I see more and more churches having passovers lately and trying to integrate more and more Jewish traditions into their services... which inevitably ends to more and more misunderstandings of the differences between the old and new covenants.

 

[TrakeM]

Who doesn't go against the bible? I think Boko Haram come the closest to following the old testament. Just read deuteronomy 13. god commands that his followers murder anyone who doesn't believe in him and murder every man woman and child (don't forget to murder the infants) in towns that believe in a different god.

 

[Traditio]

Amen. :thumb:

I have serious doubts about this.

"Capital punishment is cruel, inhuman and an offense to the dignity of human life. In today's world, the death penalty is 'inadmissible, however serious the crime' that has been committed."

1. What about the Mosaic Law? I have yet to hear a defense of [recent] papal statements, e.g., from St. Pope John Paul II and from Pope Francis (which, it seems to me, are much stronger than Pope John Paul II's) which are consistent with the judicial practices of the ancient Jewish State.

If you tell me that the death penalty is permissible only in those cases in which it is strictly necessary for the defense of the civil community, then I'll start enumerating the crimes in the Mosaic Law which call for capital punishment, and I'll point out that several of them do not put the civil community in any real danger. Killing such persons does not constitute an act of civic self defense. In fact, picking up sticks on the sabbath has nothing to do with civic justice at all.

Do you wish to defend the pope's statements? Then read the Law, remind yourself that it was holy, just and good (Romans 7:12), and explain to me what plausible reading of the Law coheres with the pronouncements of St. Pope John Paul II and Pope Francis.

But, perhaps, you will tell me that God is the Lord of life and death, and he can confer the authority to kill on anyone he pleases, since all deserve to die the death of nature (as St. Thomas Aquinas says). That would, of course, be a nice dodge and incredibly unhelpful, since we are here dealing with a civic code of legal justice (albeit one which was divinely revealed).

Again, how can Pope Francis and Pope John Paul II condemn torture when the Mosaic Law itself commands it, in particular, as a punishment for crime (up to 30 lashes for certain crimes, as I recall)?

But that is a religious objection.

A greater objection is that the statements of these two popes do not cohere with the apparent datum of philosophic reason. That the State put certain persons to death as the due merit for their crimes is a strict obligation of justice. Are you a fan of Aristotle? Then consider that in Nicomachean Ethics V, Aristotle makes strict arithmetic proportion the standard of criminal/retributive justice. Not mere reciprocity is enough, Cruciform. The criminal must pay back what he took, and he must be punished in addition.

If you apply strict arithmetic proportion to certain crimes (e.g., murder), you will find, I believe, that the strict obligation of justice is that the criminal die, and not only that, but that he die a painful death. Our man, Cruciform, is a serial rapist and murderer who subjects his victims to the cruelest tortures? Into the brazen bull with him. He deserves nothing less, and the State owes it to him. After all, he has a right to it! If the State withholds from our criminal what is his right, then the State violates the order of justice.

Consider furthermore the testimony of St. Thomas Aquinas (who holds, as I recall, in the Summa Theologiae, that certain crimes reduce the criminal to the status of a brute beast and, thus, may be killed by the State authorities for his crimes) and of Immanuel Kant (who holds that the death penalty is strictly required for certain crimes).

And have you read Plato's Laws, Cruciform? The death penalty abounds.

"But charity," you will say, "should stay the State's hand, shouldn't it? Perhaps the criminal will eventually repent and amend his life." But Christian charity is not the business of the State. Justice is. On this side of eternity, the State must execute justice. What God does on the other side of eternity...that's none of the State's business. :idunno:

So, in sum, Cruciform, do you wish to convince me (as, if you are correct, you should)?

Then

1. Explain the Mosaic Law.
2. Bring forth the testimony of the philosophers (especially those who were not having to tow a religious line). What have they said about capital punishment?

 

[genuineoriginal]

It would appear that "serpentdove" has reversed his position given that Jesus, like Pope Francis, showed compassion for someone who would have been been stoned under Mosaic Law.

According to Mosaic Law, the woman was not to be stoned.
Jesus acted in accordance with the Law of God given to the children of Israel through Moses.

 

[Cruciform]

I have serious doubts about this.

"Capital punishment is cruel, inhuman and an offense to the dignity of human life. In today's world, the death penalty is 'inadmissible, however serious the crime' that has been committed."

CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH:

2266 The efforts of the state to curb the spread of behavior harmful to people's rights and to the basic rules of civil society correspond to the requirement of safeguarding the common good. Legitimate public authority has the right and duty to inflict punishment proportionate to the gravity of the offense. Punishment has the primary aim of redressing the disorder introduced by the offense. When it is willingly accepted by the guilty party, it assumes the value of expiation. Punishment then, in addition to defending public order and protecting people's safety, has a medicinal purpose: as far as possible, it must contribute to the correction of the guilty party.67

2267 Assuming that the guilty party's identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the Church does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against the unjust aggressor.

If, however, non-lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people's safety from the aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of the common good and more in conformity to the dignity of the human person.

Today, in fact, as a consequence of the possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, by rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm - without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself - the cases in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity "are very rare, if not practically nonexistent."68​

__________
67 Cf. Lk 23:40-43.
68 John Paul II, Evangelium vitae 56.​

Gaudium de veritate,

Cruciform
+T+

 

[Traditio]

Cruciform:

You understand that quoting the Catechism doesn't really answer my points, yes? I mean, I easily could say: "Look, the Catechism is correct in principle (lethal force should not be used if the common good can be preserved otherwise), but wrong in fact (in point of fact, it usually is unnecessary). Actually, lethal force is always necessary in such cases, and no less could suffice." My answer is that the preservation of the order of justice is a constituent part of the common good, and this only can be preserved if the State executes those persons who have committed crimes worthy of death. I.e., I could (and do) claim that the common good ipso facto is injured if the State does not execute someone who has been proven to have committed a crime intrinsically worthy of death.

Recent popes will appeal to self-defense and the intrinsic dignity of the human person.

I appeal to justice. :idunno:

 

[everready]

Why should it matter what the pope says he's just another man?

everready