Why LDS doctrine requires opposition to the death penalty

[VisionOfLehi]

Context ISN'T everything, Sir.

I may be a new member, but even I am familiar with many of the scripture masteries, including:

Ne. 19: 23 And I did read many things unto them which were written in the books of Moses; but that I might more fully persuade them to believe in the Lord their Redeemer I did read unto them that which was written by the prophet Isaiah; for I did liken all scriptures unto us, that it might be for our profit and learning. (Emphasis added.)

D&C 42:19 does not say "but he that killeth shall be put to death"

If you read verse 18, you get what, in my opinion, makes more sense.

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.

If you kill, you will not have forgiveness in this world, or the next. That IS death. It is spiritual death. Verse 19 clarifies this.

Going on in that same chapter, we get the TEMPORAL punishment for killing, which is not to be slain in turn.

D&C 42:79

And it shall come to pass, that if any persons among you shall kill they shall be delivered up and dealt with according to the laws of the land; for remember that he hath no forgiveness; and it shall be proved according to the laws of the land. (Emphasis added)

[Gwen]

so this is more question in the form of thought process so those that know more than i do (i admit my knowledge is limited) feel free to correct me. not necessarly for or against the death penalty but what do we do with the most vile without it. from what i i know (again limited) the prision system isn't that good to begin with. does everyone get a private room and a personal bodyguard to protect them from the most vile, or do the most vile get them to keep them from continuing their behavior in prison. "crime" in prison is rampant, they aren't "safe". is it better to say well you deserve to die, but we don't believe in the death penalty so we'll lock you up the rest of your life to be subjected to this life. or better they could get in the situation to be the "ruler" of the place. what is to stop them from getting messages to the outside. or gaining "contorl" over ppl that will get out and then using them to continue thier lifestyle. why not just remove them from the population and let god deal with them. the culture of prisions is scary to me. why propogate that by giving the most vial access to ppl that we already know are impressionable to criminal behavior.

i'm sure this guy wasn't in for a vile crime, but something i experianced that tells me we have major issues with the system and the death penalty isn't at the top of the list. i got a collect call from a prison near a town where i have family, unfortunately i've got family that have been in and out for various reasons. at first i denied the call. but then i got it twice the next day (the recording didn't say who the call was from, just from the jail and do i accept charges). and then twice the next day. i got to worrying that this person apparently knew who they were calling, so i finally accepted the call. it wasn't family it was a stranger who then wanted me to look up a number of a woman in our area in the phone book. !!!!??? "please help me, i'm in trouble, i need to talk to this person, will you find their number for me" i don't think so. i promplty hung up. later i get the phone bill (no charge rate was mentioned before accepting the call) and found out that less than 2 min cost me $20. the calls kept comming and more frequant, i kept refusing the charges. after about a week i was starting to get worried, with a phone number and the internet he could not only find out who i was but get a map to my front door. i don't know who this guy is, what he is in for, or when he's getting out. so i look up and called the jail directly to complain about this problem. the response i got was sickening to me. "the calls are $20 for the first X min and $15 a min after. we don't trace or record phone calls that would violate the prisoners rights. we have no way to know who is calling you. this is a common scam. they will randomly dial numbers to area codes they know looking for ppl, then ask folks for help. now that you have answered a call they will pester you till you help them. we can block your number from being called from the prison if you like, that is all we can do to stop the calls. if you ever know someone here that you want to be able to call you, you will have to call and have it unblocked. would you like me to do that for you now?"

what the heck??!! what about my rights? i'm not in jail, i obeyed the law, and now i'm being harassed and there is no way to even say who is doing it so i can complain. caller id doesn't help. the jail won't violate the inmates rights but they are allowed to violate mine. something is wrong with that.

[HiJolly]

If you read verse 18, you get what, in my opinion, makes more sense.

If you kill, you will not have forgiveness in this world, or the next. That IS death. It is spiritual death. Verse 19 clarifies this.

I think it might be fruitful to ponder these two scriptural views, then: First, That Christ forgave those who shed His blood; Second, this scripture in D&C 42:18. As Joseph said, by proving contraries the truth is made manifest.

HiJolly

[HiJolly]

The unforgivable sin is denying Christ after you have a perfect witness of him and have had him revealed to you as God's Son and your rightful Lord.

That is expressly contrary to the scripture. The unforgivable is not denying Christ, but denying the Holy Ghost, as spoken by the Savior Himself. If you disagree, you should explain how this can be so.

But not Judas or the Jewish leaders who knew who Christ was and assented to his death anyway. The Romans weren't accountable because they lacked the light and knowledge necessary to make them culpable of the crime Judas committed with his perfect knowledge of Christ's divine identity.

Why not Judas or the Jewish leaders? I'm curious where you get this belief. I do not believe it is sustained in the scriptures, but I'm willing to listen...

Denying Christ after you have a perfect spiritual witness of his divine reality, no. This is what D&C 132 means by the phrase "shedding innocent blood" and "assenting unto Christ's death."

I don't think you understand the doctrine of D&C 132. Since it is not taught in the Church today, and is not clearly spelled out in the D&C, that's not surprising. The previous also means that this is purely my own opinion.

There is in no way a useful parallel between a murderous people repenting of their wicked ways, and a society of laws executing those who break those laws.

I agree with you there.

[CrimsonKairos]

The unforgivable is not denying Christ, but denying the Holy Ghost, as spoken by the Savior Himself.

They are essentially the same thing. Joseph Smith said that to commit the unforgivable sin, you have to know who Jesus is perfectly (i.e. through the Holy Ghost's perfect witness). To deny Christ after you've had him revealed to you in perfection, is as Joseph Smith said, like staring at the noon-day sun and denying that it exists.

It is that sort of rebellious spirit which Satan possessed premortally and which led to his rebellion, and it is the same sort of rebellion against light and truth that Judas and the Jewish leaders (high priest, et al) possessed and which prompted them to have Christ crucified.

Why not Judas or the Jewish leaders?

Because they knew who Christ was. There are various scriptures about this, not all of which I feel like looking up right now, but here are two for you about Judas being a son of perdition. First, Christ's prayer during the Passover feast. Speaking of the apostles, he said:

While I was with them in the world, I kept them in thy name: those that thou gavest me I have kept, and none of them is lost, but the son of perdition; that the scripture might be fulfilled. (John 17:12)

Who is the one apostle who was "lost?" Judas, as we see here:

But behold, it sorroweth me because of the fourth generation from this generation, for they are led away captive by [satan] even as was the son of perdition; for they will sell me for silver and for gold, and for that which moth doth corrupt and which thieves can break through and steal. And in that day will I visit them, even in turning their works upon their own heads. (3 Nephi 27:32)

Notice how Christ identifies the son of perdition as he who sold Christ for corruptible money? And who sold Christ for thirty pieces of silver? Judas. So Judas is a son of perdition because he had a perfect witness of Christ's divinity and still rejected the Lord.

As for Caiaphas and Annas and their crews, I suppose there is no explicit scripture I know of that condemns them as sons of perdition. I do not know the extent of their witness of Christ's divinity, but it seems to me that anyone who lived in Israel during Christ's three year mortal ministry, and who had as keen an interest in Christ as the Jewish High Priest/s did and were aware of his teachings and miracles, and who still rejected him, had to have been borderline sons of perdition. But that's my opinion, not doctrine so take it for what it is.

What is doctrine is that Judas will not be forgiven in or out of this world, and he will dwell with Satan in outer darkness eternally.

I don't think you understand the doctrine of D&C 132.

Likewise. :)

Since it is not taught in the Church today, and is not clearly spelled out in the D&C, that's not surprising. The previous also means that this is purely my own opinion.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree then. I do not consider the Bible Dictionary on par with scripture in terms of authority, nor do I form my doctrinal knowledge based on Bible Dictionary entries, but I did find this in the entry under "Blasphemy"

Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, which is willfully denying Christ after having received a perfect knowledge of him from the Holy Ghost, is the unforgivable sin (Matt. 12: 31-32; Mark 3: 28-29; D&C 132: 27).

I think if you do some more reading and studying, you will find that the prophets (I don't own the Encyclopedia of Mormonism but I assume it'd say it too) have taught that blasphemy against the Holy Ghost which in D&C 132 is called shedding innocent blood, consists of denying Christ's divine identity after having a perfect witness of it from the Holy Ghost.

[VisionOfLehi]

Why not Judas and them?

Simple answer, really, is the JST. Which I actually don't like in this verse.

JST Luke 23:34

¶ Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do (Meaning the soldiers who crucified him). And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.

[CrimsonKairos]

I may be a new member, but even I am familiar with many of the scripture masteries, including:

By the way, VOL, I forgot to comment on this part of one of your earlier posts. I don't recall saying you were wrong because you were a new member. I have no idea how long anyone here has been a member or even if they are a member, so understand that I try not to belittle anyone based on the duration of their membership in the LDS Church.

I do my best to discern doctrine from the LDS canon and not based on the status of those I dialogue with. By the way, good point about the JST in Luke 23:34 clarifying who Jesus was forgiving.

Now as for everyone else who has asserted that a person murdering a fellow mortal is the unforgivable sin (as opposed to denying Christ and figuratively shedding his innocent blood), consider this example of a whole group of murderers being forgiven:

And I also thank my God, yea, my great God, that he hath granted unto us that we might repent of these things, and also that he hath forgiven us of those our many sins and murders which we have committed, and taken away the guilt from our hearts, through the merits of his Son. (Alma 24:10)

[Still_Small_Voice]

Premise #1 is incorrect. Therefore, the entire logical chain is invalid. Christ Himself forgave the Roman soldiers who shed His blood. Therefore, the shedding of innocent blood can be forgiven, as per scripture.

Also, the application of the view of premise #1 to society as a whole is invalid, based on the doctrinal statement it is based on (D&C 132), which is addressing individuals.

HiJolly

The Romans were not guilty of Christ's blood because they were not the cause of His execution. Those who had wilfully rejected Him and sought for Christ's death were guilty of His blood.

I support the death penalty because of the scriptures I have read that support it. I will quote one:

Alma Chapter 1

12 But Alma said unto him: Behold, this is the first time that priestcraft has been introduced among this people. And behold, thou art not only guilty of priestcraft, but hast endeavored to enforce it by the sword; and were priestcraft to be enforced among this people it would prove their entire destruction.

13 And thou hast shed the blood of a righteous man, yea, a man who has done much good among this people; and were we to spare thee his blood would come upon us for vengeance.

14 Therefore thou art condemned to die, according to the law which has been given us by Mosiah, our last king; and it has been acknowledged by this people; therefore this people must abide by the law.

15 And it came to pass that they took him; and his name was Nehor; and they carried him upon the top of the hill Manti, and there he was caused, or rather did acknowledge, between the heavens and the earth, that what he had taught to the people was contrary to the word of God; and there he suffered an ignominious death.

There are also other scriptures some already quoted in this thread that support capital punishment:

Genesis 9:6

II Nephi 9:35

Doctrine & Covenants 42:19

[Stampede]

Yeah, in the scriptures (even the D&C) God commands the murderer to be killed.

Other than that, I enjoyed your syllogisms.

There are times which God commanded someone to kill someone else. But that does nto mean we get to pick and choose then who dies and who lives.

the Death penalty is wrong. Each person needs to have thier fair chance in mortality to repent and be forgiven of thier sins.

Killing them does not always give them the opportunity to do so.

[CrimsonKairos]

But that does nto mean we get to pick and choose then who dies and who lives.

Sure it does. Its called a jury of your peers.

the Death penalty is wrong.

But I guess murdering innocent people is okay. We don't want to dissuade future murderers, we better make sure all murderers get to spend the rest of their lives in a jail while their victims float in the spirit world, separated from their families.

Best idea I've ever heard (he said with a healthy dose of sarcasm and disgust).

Each person needs to have thier fair chance in mortality to repent and be forgiven of thier sins.

It is not the government's job to ensure people have the chance to repent of their sins. It is the government's job to protect equal rights for all. If you take someone else's life, you forfeit your own.

Murderers can be forgiven in the sense that they won't go to outer darkness, but D&C 76 shows that the best murderers can hope for is the Telestial Kingdom. They can do their "repenting" just as well in the spirit world as they can here.

It's ridiculous to say, "Oooh, we better not shove murderers out of this world before they can repent!" because they can "repent" in spirit prison.

Killing them does not always give them the opportunity to do so.

Executing murderers never robs them of the ability to do so; your point is incredibly flimsy and unsupportable.

Unless you know of a scripture that says you cannot repent while in the spirit world. One last verse from the OT, a commandment of God to Noah and his sons:

Whoso sheddeth man’s blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man. (Gen. 9:6)

[prisonchaplain]

In the midst of all this detailed discussion, there remains the perception that most LDs would likely favor the death penalty. The realty might be different, but that's the perception. Thoughts?

[CrimsonKairos]

You're correct, PC.

[VisionOfLehi]

By the way, VOL, I forgot to comment on this part of one of your earlier posts. I don't recall saying you were wrong because you were a new member. I have no idea how long anyone here has been a member or even if they are a member, so understand that I try not to belittle anyone based on the duration of their membership in the LDS Church.

It wasn't meant to be taken that way. I meant it in the sense that "This should be really obvious... even I know it already."

Kinda... more being a smart aleck than anything else

[CrimsonKairos]

10-4.

[WANDERER]

Prison chaplain: It would appear so to me

In the midst of all this detailed discussion, there remains the perception that most LDs would likely favor the death penalty. The realty might be different, but that's the perception. Thoughts?

But I wonder if that would differ depending on location i.e. where it isn't a legal practice.

[Elgama]

In the midst of all this detailed discussion, there remains the perception that most LDs would likely favor the death penalty. The realty might be different, but that's the perception. Thoughts?

could that simply be in America that most LDS are to the right in their politics? the reverse has in my experience been true in the UK, and have to say its not really a matter of discussion here. As I said in a previous post for me its like torture it belongs to a more violent and less civilized past. Any form of the death penalty just feels wrong. Whilst I know torture isn't entirely in the past or the death penalty for people around the world - I do believe it should be, and that neither should play a part in our legal system. However I did surprise my husband when he asked me about the Chinese Official when I said that the only time I feel maybe the death penalty should be in operation is for corrupt elected officials you take on a much greater level of responsibility when you are elected and the posts should be treated with reverence.

-Charley

[CrimsonKairos]

See, I only think the death penalty should be used when someone murders or causes someone to lose life through negligence or inaction, and in the case of treason. Maybe there are other instances I'm not thinking of right now.

The whole point of using the death penalty is to dissuade criminals and hence, encourage a more civilized society and world. If murderers know that the worst they can expect is two to three square meals a day for the rest of their lives, then the power to dissuade is diluted.

That is why I said that the death penalty is society's way of affirming the value of human life.

[Francine]

Unless you know of a scripture that says you cannot repent while in the spirit world.

Alma 34:33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

[john doe]

I have no problem with the death penalty if it is proven that without a doubt the person willfully murdered another. I call it Justice.

[Francine]

I have no problem with the death penalty if it is proven that without a doubt the person willfully murdered another. I call it Justice.

Before Calvary, God's justice said that man atoned for the shedding of man's blood with his own blood. Now men have recourse to the atonement of Christ's once and for all sacrifice of his own blood on the cross. Jesus was the final human sacrifice for sin.

[prisonchaplain]

Before Calvary, God's justice said that man atoned for the shedding of man's blood with his own blood. Now men have recourse to the atonement of Christ's once and for all sacrifice of his own blood on the cross. Jesus was the final human sacrifice for sin.

Jesus can make us right with God, but we are still subject to human governments. The administration that Moses set up, in inspiration from God, included an active death penalty.

[Francine]

Jesus can make us right with God, but we are still subject to human governments. The administration that Moses set up, in inspiration from God, included an active death penalty.

It is written, (Hos.6:6) For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

[CrimsonKairos]

Alma 34:33 And now, as I said unto you before, as ye have had so many witnesses, therefore, I beseech of you that ye do not procrastinate the day of your repentance until the end; for after this day of life, which is given us to prepare for eternity, behold, if we do not improve our time while in this life, then cometh the night of darkness wherein there can be no labor performed.

He was here speaking specifically to a group who had received the teachings of Christ through the Nephite missionaries. They were now accountable, as opposed to one who died without knowledge of the gospel.

The point of Alma 34:33 is not that you can't repent in spirit prison, for D&C 138 explicitly says that many in spirit prison will repent and be saved.

[CrimsonKairos]

It is written, (Hos.6:6) For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

That has nothing to do with Israel's civil laws under Moses. Hosea 6:6 is talking about the religious obligations of Israel, specifically burnt offerings. This verse does not address the death penalty or its propriety in God's sight. I'm confused why you used Hosea 6:6?

[prisonchaplain]

It is written, (Hos.6:6) For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.

Clearly this call to mercy did not result in doing away with the death penalty, either in the law of Moses, nor in Bible-era Israel.

BTW, I'm not necessarily arguing for the death penalty...just disagreeing the argument that Scripture unquestionably opposes it.