Quote
Yasmin
I think the crux of the matter is where you stated that you do not see something wrong with whipping someone.
I think you're right about that. I figured that's where most people were first running into disagreement with the whipping. That there was a whipping at all.
Quote
Yasmin
And it does add, given the Christian beliefs of the Jesus Christians the question: what would Jesus do to someone who wronged him...Turn the other cheek perhaps??
Of course, always easier to say that one than actually do it, for everyone, and most of us don't manage to pull it off very often.
This is a hard issue for me, one I've never been able to come to a conclusion on. What would a 100% sold out Christian country look like? Or probably better what would a 98% sold out Christian 2% criminal country look like? If someone decides to be a murderer or a theif how many times should we turn the other cheek? 70 x 7? Is that how many people have to die before we'd say, "Ok look we see a pattern, this guy likes to kill people. Let's lock him up or something."
It sort of seems like a cop-out to say I'll be Christian myself and turn the other cheek and that'll work fine as long as I've got a government that won't turn the other cheek to bring the smack down on anyone who wrongs me. A legitimate government gets its authority and direction from the people it was formed by so claiming to turn the other cheek while hiring yourself a government to punish for you is really not any different than demanding repayment yourself. You've just put in a middle man to confuse yourself into thinking you haven't demanded payment from anybody.
But the idea of a government that would constantly turn the other cheek would seem completely unjust. It would let the strong and the wicked free reign to trample over everybody. Does that show a lack of faith in God to act in a real way? Probably, but I'm sure I share my lack of faith with the vast majority of humanity.
Quote
apostate
It is curious that you say you have no problem with the Kenyan government whipping people and yet the Kenyan government clearly does ... . So having posted what the Kenyan government clearly thinks about the issue of whipping I would have to say that the corrupt police and the Jesus Christians are clearly out of line as the group whipped the Kenyan volunteer in 2006, 3 years after the criminal law code of Kenya was changed. This means that the JC's engaged in a criminal action. Still not having a problem with a professing Christian "quaker" group whipping someone?
It doesn't matter what any government thinks about a whipping as to if it's moral or not. If corporal punishment is a moral punishment it is just as moral now that Kenya rejects it. If it is not a moral punishment Kenyas previous endorsement of it did not make it any more legitimate.
I believe corporal punishment can be more effective than incarceration. It probably depends on the person. As long as the punishment doesn't cause any permanent damage I see it as only a deterent to prevent crime. Do you believe it's moral to keep someone in a cage against their will? I'd rather take 5 lashes than be locked in a cage for a month, but that's a personal choice I suppose. I can't look at hobbles and I can't stand fences.
Quote
apostate
Yes they did. That volunteer had the right to NOT get whipped according to Kenyan law since 2003. That was ignored in the dispensation of JC vigilante justice
The volunteer retained his right not to get whipped. Two of the three choices involved him not getting whipped (as long as the government follows its own laws). He could have had someone else get whipped for him or get turned into the authorities. He
chose to give up his right to not be whipped when he
chose the option that resulted in him being whipped. He chose to steal and he chose to not get the justice afforded him by the state. While he retained the right to not get whipped, he excercized a choice offered to him by the JCs in which he wouldn't excercise that particular right in exchange for getting out of the criminal proceeding for his theft.
What is left then to argue is if this course of action by the JCs was the most Christian. What is the most Christian action? To follow Christs command to turn the other cheek or to follow Christs imperitive to love your brother and seek the best way possible to reform a thief (keeping in mind a theif won't enter the kingdom of God). If turning the other cheek would let someone continue along a path towards destruction should we do that or should we do what is in our power to try and turn them back? If we choose to try and turn them back is offering a whipping to them, or offering to take the whipping in their place the best way to turn them back? If not what's the best way to reform a theif? Wouldn't the
best way to reform a theif depend on the temperment of the individual?