Relationship with Heavenly Parents

[JLHPROF]

7 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

One thing life in prison does is protects society from the criminal without taking life.

Life in prison allows the possibility of repentance as well.

Is there always the possibility of repentance though?
Do we not believe that there are such things as unforgivable sins or sins not covered under the atonement?  Scripture indicates there are.

[MacGyver]

4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Is there always the possibility of repentance though?
Do we not believe that there are such things as unforgivable sins or sins not covered under the atonement?  Scripture indicates there are.

I believe that there is always the possibility of repentance at some point, but for some sins, like premeditated murder, forgiveness can only be obtained through hell. Even sons of perdition will get another chance eventually, but it won't be in this life or in the spirit world. It will be sometime after that.

[JLHPROF]

11 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I believe that there is always the possibility of repentance at some point, but for some sins, like premeditated murder, forgiveness can only be obtained through hell. Even sons of perdition will get another chance eventually, but it won't be in this life or in the spirit world. It will be sometime after that.

Well sure.  But in the event of unforgivable sin being committed and repentance not being possible in this life, I find that a weak argument against the death penalty.

[ksfisher]

38 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Sure, but is it truly just to allow a murderer to live, after having murdered another human being? Why should the murderer be allowed to live, when they took this away from another?

That sounds a lot like and eye or an eye. 

 

39 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I understand this view, but it really all depends on what is required of a murderer to gain forgiveness. If God requires that they be put to death and suffer in hell before they can be forgiven, then keeping them alive doesn't help them repent. It may even impede their repentance by prohibiting them from making any restitution for their crime in this life.

So we should put people to death because maybe that's what they need in order to repent?

[ksfisher]

41 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Is there always the possibility of repentance though?
Do we not believe that there are such things as unforgivable sins or sins not covered under the atonement?  Scripture indicates there are.

I believe that every sin will be forgiven, as long as forgiveness is asked for.  The only sins that will never be forgiven are the sins where no forgiveness is asked for.

My personal belief is that refusing to ask for forgiveness is what constitutes denying the Holy Ghost.

That's not saying all will be rewarded the same.

[JLHPROF]

4 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So we should put people to death because maybe that's what they need in order to repent?

Do you think gospel law is that vague?

Nephi was specifically instructed to kill Laban.  God has at many times instructed the sinner to be put to death.
Scripture teaches that some sins cannot be forgiven in this life.

I know we disavow any blood atonement doctrine or practices, but the gospel principles that led to Brigham and others espousing such doctrine and practices remain in our beliefs.

Quote

I believe that every sin will be forgiven, as long as forgiveness is asked for.  The only sins that will never be forgiven are the sins where no forgiveness is asked for.

I don't and neither does scripture.

 

Edited December 28, 2021 by JLHPROF

[MacGyver]

13 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

That sounds a lot like and eye or an eye. 

Yeah, I get that. But the law requiring the death penalty for murderers was given prior to and after the law of Moses. It wasn't done away with the atonement of Christ. It was given immediately after the flood, in the Book of Mormon, in the D&C, and was taught by Joseph Smith, Brigham Young, and other early church leaders. 

15 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

So we should put people to death because maybe that's what they need in order to repent?

No, we should put murderers to death because God told us to. We should trust what he says. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, MacGyver said:

Sure, but is it truly just to allow a murderer to live, after having murdered another human being?

When someone steals from one person, is it considered justice for the victim to steal from the criminal?

If someone is arrested for assaulting another person, beating them bad enough to put in the hospital, is it justice then to put them in the hospital?

If someone is a rapist, does the government hire someone to rape them as punishment?

[Calm]

2 hours ago, MacGyver said:

some sins, like premeditated murder, forgiveness can only be obtained through hell.

But there is a difference in judgment from God who knows our hearts and minds and understands why someone committed murder as opposed to humans who in the end are guessing because we can’t read minds. 

When it appears that there are higher numbers than average that those of lower intelligence are executed, how can we be sure they understood the consequences of their crime and chose to do it anyway?

When those who commit murder were raised in a violent environment, how can we know they understand the law of God well enough that it is just to kill them?

[MacGyver]

16 minutes ago, Calm said:

When someone steals from one person, is it considered justice for the victim to steal from the criminal?

In the case of theft, the criminal is usually required to make restitution payments. 

18 minutes ago, Calm said:

If someone is arrested for assaulting another person, beating them bad enough to put in the hospital, is it justice then to put them in the hospital?

Public floggings use to be a thing. And I believe that would be just in this case. But prison time and paying for the persons medical bills plus pain and suffering is also just, because the person who was assaulted will recover and then go back about their business. So restitution was made.

21 minutes ago, Calm said:

If someone is a rapist, does the government hire someone to rape them as punishment?

Depending on how heinous the rape is either the death penalty of a long prison sentence is appropriate. Again, the victims life wasn't taken. God also didn't say to have the perpetrator raped. He said to put them to death. 

[MacGyver]

Duplicate post

Edited December 28, 2021 by MacGyver

[MacGyver]

18 minutes ago, Calm said:

But there is a difference in judgment from God who knows our hearts and minds and understands why someone committed murder as opposed to humans who in the end are guessing because we can’t read minds. 

When it appears that there are higher numbers than average that those of lower intelligence are executed, how can we be sure they understood the consequences of their crime and chose to do it anyway?

When those who commit murder were raised in a violent environment, how can we know they understand the law of God well enough that it is just to kill them?

We believe in repentance in the spirit world, don't we? So, while I understand your concerns, I don't see the problem with following God's command to put murderers to death.

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

We believe in repentance in the spirit world, don't we? So, while I understand your concerns, I don't see the problem with following God's command to put murderers to death.

You don’t see a problem with killing someone who didn’t actually murder because they can’t conceive the intent required to murder?

[Calm]

9 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

In the case of theft, the criminal is usually required to make restitution payments. 

However this is done based on their ability to pay, it is not taken from them no matter what in one lump and immediately when judgment is passed. They are given the opportunity to pay it back as they can even if it is required much in the same way child support or taxes are required. 

[Calm]

13 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

And I believe that would be just in this case. But prison time and paying for the persons medical bills plus pain and suffering is also just, because the person who was assaulted will recover and then go back about their business. So restitution was made.

And how is taking someone’s life restoring what was lost in a murder?  Restitution would be the murderer stepping in and filling the role of the victim they killed, not killing them as well. Nothing is restored by another death. 

[MacGyver]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

You don’t see a problem with killing someone who didn’t actually murder because they can’t conceive the intent required to murder?

No, that's not what I said.

Obviously if someone was being abused for years and then killed their abuser in a premeditated attack, or something to that, then that changes things. But I don't think someone growing up in a violent neighborhood were murder is common place, means they get a free pass and aren't guilty of murder if they murder someone.

[MacGyver]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

However this is done based on their ability to pay, it is not taken from them no matter what in one lump and immediately when judgment is passed. They are given the opportunity to pay it back as they can even if it is required much in the same way child support or taxes are required. 

Their wages are garnished until the debt is paid off and restitution has been made. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here.

[MacGyver]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

And how is taking someone’s life restoring what was lost in a murder?  Restitution would be the murderer stepping in and filling the role of the victim they killed, not killing them as well. Nothing is restored by another death. 

Being put to death is the most just thing to do. While it won't help the victim, other than satisfying the demands of justice, it does partially atone for the terrible sin the murderer committed before God.

This is what Amulek was talking about when he said:

11 Now there is not any man that can sacrifice his own blood which will atone for the sins of another. Now, if a man murdereth, behold will our law, which is just, take the life of his brother? I say unto you, Nay.

12 But the law requireth the life of him who hath murdered;

Alma 34

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Is there always the possibility of repentance though?
Do we not believe that there are such things as unforgivable sins or sins not covered under the atonement?  Scripture indicates there are.

I am not convinced there are sins that are not covered by the atonement. It is said to be infinite. I do believe there are acts so inherently self-destructive that they hinder the person’s ability to ever choose to repent. I think you can kill the Light of Christ to the point you will never choose to repent because the part of the spirit the Spirit works with is gone. I suspect that if Lucifer returned to the Father in sackcloth and ashes begging for forgiveness that through the atonement he would be.

Or, as one Priesthood leader described to me about Perdition: “If they repented they would be forgiven but they can’t so they won’t.”

[The Nehor]

9 hours ago, katherine the great said:

They can’t choose the punishment but they can give victim impact statements that may (but don’t  usually seem to) influence the punishment.  I can think of one situation where I wish the victim had more say in the punishment. That is when the  perp is a one time offender and is the parent or child of the victim. I read about a Texas case (I think) where the son killed the mother and other son but the father survived. The state sentenced him to the death penalty but through the father’s pleas for mercy, at the last moment it was commuted to life in prison (probably in order to avoid inflicting more pain on the lone survivor). I thought that was the right decision in the circumstances.  

Reminds me of the opposite impact in the Michigan school shooting case where the parents made a run for it and became fugitives when it was determined they were partially culpable for the kid’s actions. Then, once arrested, they quickly got lawyers. The kid was stuck with a public defender. No parent of the year awards are expected in the near future.

[JLHPROF]

13 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am not convinced there are sins that are not covered by the atonement. It is said to be infinite. I do believe there are acts so inherently self-destructive that they hinder the person’s ability to ever choose to repent. I think you can kill the Light of Christ to the point you will never choose to repent because the part of the spirit the Spirit works with is gone. I suspect that if Lucifer returned to the Father in sackcloth and ashes begging for forgiveness that through the atonement he would be.

Or, as one Priesthood leader described to me about Perdition: “If they repented they would be forgiven but they can’t so they won’t.”

I still don't agree.

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

D&C 42:18 And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come.
19 And again, I say, thou shalt not kill; but he that killeth shall die.

D&C 84:40 Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.
41 But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come

"There are sins for which there is no forgiveness, neither in this world nor in the world to come. There are sins which utterly and completely preclude the sinner from gaining eternal life. Hence there are sins for which repentance does not operate, sins that the atoning blood of Christ will not wash away, sins for which the sinner must suffer and pay the full penalty personally." Bruce R. McConkie

 “The unpardonable sin is to shed innocent blood, or be accessory thereto." Joseph Smith

"Because of this rebellion, the fulness of the atonement of Jesus Christ is not effective in murderers’ lives. In order for the demands of justice to be met, murderers must pay the price themselves before they can enter into a kingdom of glory." Harold B. Lee

"Now, we read that many bodies of the Saints arose at Christ’s resurrection, probably all the Saints, but it seems that David did not. Why? Because he had been a murderer. If the ministers of religion had a proper understanding of the doctrine of eternal judgment, they would not be found attending the man who forfeited his life to the injured laws of his country, by shedding innocent blood; for such characters cannot be forgiven, until they have paid the last farthing." (TPJS 188–89)

Joseph Smith declared: “If a man commit adultery, he cannot receive the celestial kingdom of God. Even if he is saved in any kingdom, it cannot be the celestial kingdom” (HC 6:81)

 

[The Nehor]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

I still don't agree.

Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,
27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

D&C 42:18 And now, behold, I speak unto the church. Thou shalt not kill; and he that kills shall not have forgiveness in this world, nor in the world to come.
19 And again, I say, thou shalt not kill; but he that killeth shall die.

D&C 84:40 Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.
41 But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come

"There are sins for which there is no forgiveness, neither in this world nor in the world to come. There are sins which utterly and completely preclude the sinner from gaining eternal life. Hence there are sins for which repentance does not operate, sins that the atoning blood of Christ will not wash away, sins for which the sinner must suffer and pay the full penalty personally." Bruce R. McConkie

 “The unpardonable sin is to shed innocent blood, or be accessory thereto." Joseph Smith

"Because of this rebellion, the fulness of the atonement of Jesus Christ is not effective in murderers’ lives. In order for the demands of justice to be met, murderers must pay the price themselves before they can enter into a kingdom of glory." Harold B. Lee

"Now, we read that many bodies of the Saints arose at Christ’s resurrection, probably all the Saints, but it seems that David did not. Why? Because he had been a murderer. If the ministers of religion had a proper understanding of the doctrine of eternal judgment, they would not be found attending the man who forfeited his life to the injured laws of his country, by shedding innocent blood; for such characters cannot be forgiven, until they have paid the last farthing." (TPJS 188–89)

Joseph Smith declared: “If a man commit adultery, he cannot receive the celestial kingdom of God. Even if he is saved in any kingdom, it cannot be the celestial kingdom” (HC 6:81)

 

I am not attempting to dispute those quotes. I am questioning whether the inability to find forgiveness for these sins is because the atonement can’t handle them (which I doubt) or whether it is instead that some sins extinguish the light within the spirit so completely that there is nothing left that desires to repent once those sins are committed. They might long for happiness or some way out (like the people Mormon spoke of) but it is the repentance of the damned that is seeking more to find a way to find happiness in sin.

As to that last quote I don’t believe it. Joseph Smith did not consistently believe it or preach it. I have seen some serious damage done by that quote to people trying to repent.

[katherine the great]

33 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Reminds me of the opposite impact in the Michigan school shooting case where the parents made a run for it and became fugitives when it was determined they were partially culpable for the kid’s actions. Then, once arrested, they quickly got lawyers. The kid was stuck with a public defender. No parent of the year awards are expected in the near future.

Some animals do eat their young. 🤷‍♀️

[Calm]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

to that last quote I don’t believe it. Joseph Smith did not consistently believe it or preach it. I have seen some serious damage done by that quote to people trying to repent.

According to at least Bruce R McConkie, JS was only talking about those whose calling and election was made sure…and exactly what that actually means….

https://emp.byui.edu/ANDERSONR/itc/Doctrine_and_Covenants/sections101-138/section132/132_04callelectadultry_js.htm

It could also be interpreted as the adultery is ongoing, not repented of as opposed to ‘if any man has committed adultery’ which would be a last act. 

Edited December 29, 2021 by Calm

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, katherine the great said:

Some animals do eat their young. 🤷‍♀️

The more I learned of the parents the more empathy I had for the kid. He never stood a chance.