Terri Schiavo Update

kansas baptist,
You are stretching my point way beyond what I stated (as is becoming common on this thread). My point is simply that God has given the right to secular governments to punish those who do evil. Are your commentators disputing that? I rather doubt it.

Also, I did not know that you attended Dallas, Fuller, TEDS, and Southern Baptist Seminaries. You have quite a resume! On your sig it just states Tabor and that venerable institution GSST.

BLD

 

But he goes on to say "Although according to the Torah murder was punishable by death, the Rabbis proceeded nonetheless to make a judicial conviction, which would render the penalty mandatory, more and more difficult. Thus in the second centery CE capital punishment was decried by most Sages and it has been abolished in modern Israel."

If those who live by "The Law" have issues reconciling capital punishment (in spite of what would seem clear direction), I would think those under the new covenant of grace would really struggle with this notion.

 

Holy smokes...

I've been gone a few days, and I tuned back in to theological banter. This forum has gone way off topic.

OK then, I think I'm throwing in the towel here. I need to get off of this forum for awhile before I go gray. Let's keep watching the news to see what happens.

 

My dear BLD:

You lie. I do not whine. Having been called a Nazi, I suppose being called a whiner is something of a moral promotion. Oh, goody.

You, on the other hand, are contunally abusive both to those who agree with you about Mrs Schiavo (such as myself) and to those who disagree with you about Mrs Schiavo (a number of others). Now you are adding the death penalty issue to your collected loci of imputed ideological mortal sin.

The mental busyness with which a hardened sinner (and I assure you I am not joking) occupies himself after being confronted with God's Law--the Eighth Commandment, in your case--is as spiritually tortuous as poor Mrs Schiavo's unconscious journey through the courts has been legally tortuous.

Janko the Merry Priest

PS. You will recall that Proverbs labels a fool one who insults and then claims to be joking.

PPS. Mr Green, with whom I disagree about the death penalty, seems to be handling himself quite nicely. He appears to be urbane and informed: a worthy rhetor.

 

If this had been what you said, I would have agreed with you.

Here is what you said

"And when He grants that authority (commands death) to humans, as He has done, it is an extension of His authority" --parenthetical added for clarity. You then used Rom 13:5-4 to support your conclusion.

I asked you to supply your exegesis or provide one authoritative source to support your conclusion. Instead you hurl insults at my schools as though THAT will add legitimacy to your conclusions.

I never claimed to attend any of those schools, you are trying to create controversy to deflect from you weak exegesis. I thought the folks here might appreciate the sources from which I draw my conclusions.

BTW - I really appreciate your compliment of GSST. It is a fair institution and I am learning, but even I (as a soon to be graduate) never thought of it as worthy of reverence.

 

Janko,
I know that you are always quite impressed with yourself, but it isn't rubbing off on me. If you can't take a joke (or the heat) stay out of the discussion.

If it makes you feel morally superior to call me a liar, so be it. I don't really care.

BLD

 

kansasbaptist,
There is nothing inconsistent with any of my posts on this subject. I stand by them all. God has given the authority to punish those who do evil to secular government. Where is the inconsistency?

And I'm not trying to deflect anything. I've written none of my exegesis here, only my conclusions from exegesis, so there is nothing to deflect. I thought you had stated you had these professors as hermeneutics teachers. If I'm mistaken, my apologies.

I also was not putting down GSST. I finished an M.Div. there myself, in addition to my B.B.L., B.Th., M.A., and D.Min. (all from accredited schools whose accreditation is recognized).

Perhaps if you and Janko would quit trying to impress everyone with your vast sums of knowledge you would actually read what I am saying. Instead you add volumes of inference to my position, and then argue against your own inferences. If you've taken Logic 101 you will be able to quickly deduce the problem with that. I invite you (and the most proud and humble Janko) to actually read my posts again to clarify what I've actually said in contrast to what words you have put into my mouth.

BLD

 

More lies. I guess he cain't hep hisself.

 

BLD,

I posted EXACTLY what you said. I am still waiting for you to tell me how you derive support for capital punishment from Rom 13:4-5

To recap and I am paraphrasing.

KB - death penalty is barbaric
BLD - then God must be barbaric
KB - God has the right to impose the death penalty
BLD - so does the government, it is a servant of God
KB - how did you reach that conclusion
BLD - Romans 13:4-5
KB - Those verses say Christians should be subject to civil authority, here are some authoritative resources, what are yours
BLD - My point is that government can punish people
KB - I agree, but you were providing support for capital punishment, can you tell me your sources
BLD - quit twisting my words
KB - I wasn't, here is what you said
BLD - You and Janko are just trying to impress people

PS - If I was trying to impress people with my "vast amounts of knowledge" I would not have posted my sources.

PSS - Janko knows a lot more than I do

 

kansasbaptist,
Nice job of redaction! Now, if you do it in context it will all make sense.

No doubt! He knows more than me too. Actually, from his posts I'm pretty sure he thinks he knows more than God.

BLD

 

Another lie.

 

Ok, BLD

I agree with you that civil governments have the right (and have been granted authority by God) to punish wrong.

I also agree that Romans 13:4-5 establishes the government as an entity to which Christians are subject.

Unfortunately, I fail to see how the right to punish extends to authority, by God's sanction, to use the death penality, but I will say uncle first.

I still think the death penalty is barbaric, just as I think abortion is barbaric, and I think starving Terri to death is barbaric.

BTW - my comment to Janko was friendly bantor. I have a high regard for his input, opinoins, and thoughts, though I do not always agree with him.

It was in no way meant to be a jab at his humility or position.

 

kansasbaptist,
I assure you, if we sat down in person (including Janko) you would interpret my intentions much differently than you do here. The problems with this medium are rampant, with the inability to see each other's faces, hear each other's voices, and to actually engage in normal conversation, it is easy to misunderstand each other. Janko's conclusions about me aside, I truly have been kidding with him on some of my posts, especially the ones dealing with his Lutheranism. Being that the vast majority of my congregation come from the Wisconsin and Missouri Synods, I am quite familiar with them.

Also, from what I can gather, the only difference you and I have on this topic is whether a Christian should be for the death penalty or not. I say "Yes" and you say "No." I can live with the difference.

BLD

 

kansasbaptist:

And that was the point of my first observation: By the time the Jews were done with the Torah death penalty, it was pretty well impossible to impose.

 

BLD,

I agree. It is impossible to get a read on people's emotion and intentions in this forum. That is why I believe word choice is so important.

We actually agree on numerous things.

The only issues I had were
1) I thought some of your initial comments to Deb were out of line.
2) I couldn't see where scripture grants authority or approval for the death penality.

I love to debate, but civility and respect must be at the forefont.

I respect your opinions, even if I disagree with you.

 

Wow, you guys did have fun without me. I came back ready to jump in again and, as happens here freguently, found the topic had drifted. Not being Jewish or Christian, it would be hard to jump in here. (I'm Creek.)

On coming back, I also realized that there really wasn't any more to say. After 160+ posts, we are just going to repeat ourselves. We have all stated our beliefs on these topics, some with more eloguence than others but all with a great deal of passion. No one's mind, I don't think, has been changed but we can at least agree that we are a group that can carry out an involved, emotional conversation without too much fur flying.

Thanks for an interesting dicussion.

 

Deb,
Are you referring to Creek Indian?

BLD

 

Yes.

North Alabama Porch band.

 

Err? WRONG question

Erring on "the side of life" is the right answer to a different question.

Teh question that matters under the law of Florida is WHO IS HER LEGAL GUARDIAN?

Your problem is a dislike of (1) the answer provided by the law, and (2) the course of action chosen by that legally sanctioned guardian. Who else but a husband could presume to speak for his wife? Or would you have the laws governing matrimony changed"

I sure as hell don't want you meddling in my affairs late in life! - how can you presume TS does?

-Orson