jskains Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I was talking to a fellow worker, and he told of a man who raped his own daughters nightly whenever he felt the urge. He invited friends over to also have their way with his 8 year old daughter.IMHO people like this should have a bullet help empty out their skull of what little brains they have. A comedian once quipped that if you personally even had thoughts of sexually molesting a child, you should do the world a favor and eat a bullet for the team.How is my position any different than Brigham's Blood Attonement concept? I don't see this as a problem. I do believe there are crimes for which are so horrible and ugly that only your blood hitting dirt could even give you a chance of redemption.Thoughts?
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 jskains:There was only one Blood Atonement necessary, and that one was 2000 years ago. Capital punishment is a different subject. I actually believe that that man should enjoy the fine prison facilities this country provides(for a very long time).
Rivers Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I agree with you. I do believe there are certain crimes that are heinous enough for which the death penalty would be appropriate. Most people would agree to a certain extent as demonstrated by the celebrations that took place after Bin Laden's death.But capital punishment isn't exactly what the blood atonement was about. Brigham Young said that having your own blood spilled is necessary to atone for those sins. The blood atonement wasn't so much about justice as was about redemption for the individual. That is my understanding of the blood atonement anyway. Many people object to the idea because it limits the spilling of Christ's blood.
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I believe in the Atonement of Jesus Christ and it's redemptive power. My prayer is that all might turn their hearts to Him and repent of their evil ways- no matter what those sins are. One of my favorite sayings is, "The worst sin is the one that is left not repented of." The repentant incestuous father is better off then the unrepentant gossip-monger.
jskains Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 I agree with you. I do believe there are certain crimes that are heinous enough for which the death penalty would be appropriate. Most people would agree to a certain extent as demonstrated by the celebrations that took place after Bin Laden's death.But capital punishment isn't exactly what the blood atonement was about. Brigham Young said that having your own blood spilled is necessary to atone for those sins. The blood atonement wasn't so much about justice as was about redemption for the individual. That is my understanding of the blood atonement anyway. Many people object to the idea because it limits the spilling of Christ's blood.Christ's attonment was the gateway. But that doesn't give you an automatic pass. I think the concept is that you can do something so horrible that you block yourself from Christ's own attonement.It's your fault, not an imperfection of Christ.
Rivers Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 jskains:There was only one Blood Atonement necessary, and that one was 2000 years ago. Capital punishment is a different subject. I actually believe that that man should enjoy the fine prison facilities this country provides(for a very long time).I agree. Its a lot cheaper to keep them locked up. The death penalty is such a tedious and expensive process. I'm not sure I think its worth it.
Rivers Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Christ's attonment was the gateway. But that doesn't give you an automatic pass. I think the concept is that you can do something so horrible that you block yourself from Christ's own attonement.It's your fault, not an imperfection of Christ.That makes sense. But I think Christ would rather have us turn our lives around and live for him rather than die for him.
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Rivers:Any fool can die(and we all do at some point). I'd much rather be remembered for how I lived my life, than the mere fact that I will die.
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Christ's attonment was the gateway. But that doesn't give you an automatic pass. I think the concept is that you can do something so horrible that you block yourself from Christ's own attonement.It's your fault, not an imperfection of Christ.It is clear in scripture that the only unforgivable sin is to deny the Holy Ghost. ALL other sins can be forgiven if repentance takes place. I will never tell a lost soul, "Well, Jesus can't forgive you. You were just too wicked in your past."
jskains Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 It is clear in scripture that the only unforgivable sin is to deny the Holy Ghost. ALL other sins can be forgiven if repentance takes place. I will never tell a lost soul, "Well, Jesus can't forgive you. You were just too wicked in your past."I would. Any child rapist I could easily tell them that.JMS
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I would. Any child rapist I could easily tell them that.JMSWell, luckily, you aren't Jesus.
jskains Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 Well, luckily, you aren't Jesus.Yes, I am sure Jesus likes child rapists too.JMS
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 jskains:You don't have to like someones behavior to forgive them.
jskains Posted May 13, 2011 Author Posted May 13, 2011 jskains:You don't have to like someones behavior to forgive them.We aren't talking about someone being rude or talking too loud during a movie.JMS
BookofMormonLuvr Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Yes, I am sure Jesus likes child rapists too.JMSJesus loves all of His creation and desires that all would repent and come unto Him.
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 jskains:If that were the extent of bad behaviors there would be much less need for the Atonement. Further I could empty all the jails and prisons today if that were the case. Jesus paid the price for all sin, with but one exception, and child rape, as terrible as that is, isn't it. From St. Augustine. His letter 211 (c. 424) contains the phrase Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, which translates roughly as "With love for mankind and hatred of sins."
elguanteloko Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 If sin is the action then you are never justified in hating the perpetrator. If you want to forget that you are a "Christian" for some moments and follow the desire to hate then I think a life of misery is much more fit for a horrible crime.
Flyonthewall Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 As I understand it, the sin unrepented of will not be covered by the Atonement, so the greiviousness of the sin does not necessarily exclude one from the Atonement's effects.
LeSellers Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 The death penalty is such a tedious and expensive process.It doesn't have to be. A few bucks is all it really costs. It's the incessant appeals and retrials. Once a person is found guilty, he should be subjected to a very stringent and accurate test of truthfulness: using a CATScan, ascertain what his brain looks like while telling the truth and when he's telling a lie. Put him in an iron lung and paralyze his diaphragm. Ask him, "Did you do it?" If his brain says he's lying, turn off the iron lung momentarily, then ask again. Once he tells the truth, the test is over. If he's guilty, send him to speak with Osama.Lehi
elguanteloko Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Once a person is found guilty, he should be subjected to a very stringent and accurate test of truthfulness: using a CATScan, ascertain what his brain looks like while telling the truth and when he's telling a lie. Put him in an iron lung and paralyze his diaphragm. Ask him, "Did you do it?" If his brain says he's lying, turn off the iron lung momentarily, then ask again. Once he tells the truth, the test is over. If he's guilty, send him to speak with Osama.LehiWhy should we do that?
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Lehi:First it would be highly unethical to treat any human that way. Secondly and more importantly the brain is incapable of telling the difference between a lie, and something it actually believes. Thirdly, and most importantly the use of duress is ineffective, and criminal itself, to elicit a confession.
MelvinCJohnson Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 Christ's attonment was the gateway. But that doesn't give you an automatic pass. I think the concept is that you can do something so horrible that you block yourself from Christ's own attonement. It's your fault, not an imperfection of Christ. Christ's atonement, crucifixion, and resurrection removes any barrier to salvation and life here after. Only the individual blocks himself, not the Christ. If Christ can give foregiveness to such as David and Saul, then hope in Him exists for all of us.
thesometimesaint Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 MelvinCJohnson:Even David had to pay a price of his sin. True God will not let him remain forever in Hell, but his Resurrection won't be to the Celestial Kingdom.
cinepro Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 I was talking to a fellow worker, and he told of a man who raped his own daughters nightly whenever he felt the urge. He invited friends over to also have their way with his 8 year old daughter.IMHO people like this should have a bullet help empty out their skull of what little brains they have. A comedian once quipped that if you personally even had thoughts of sexually molesting a child, you should do the world a favor and eat a bullet for the team.How is my position any different than Brigham's Blood Attonement concept? I don't see this as a problem. I do believe there are crimes for which are so horrible and ugly that only your blood hitting dirt could even give you a chance of redemption.Thoughts?As far as I know, Brigham Young's teachings on Blood Atonement only applied to murderers. So while there may be good arguments for capital punishment for child molesters, unless the molester murders someone, teachings and theories about Blood Atonement wouldn't be relevant.
elguanteloko Posted May 13, 2011 Posted May 13, 2011 MelvinCJohnson:Even David had to pay a price of his sin. True God will not let him remain forever in Hell, but his Resurrection won't be to the Celestial Kingdom.Why couldn't Christ's atonement make a mass murderer completely clean if he repented?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.