Is no person beyond redemption?

Mr Manifesto

Illuminator
M
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
4,815
It seems a lot of Americans are obsessed in the idea of revenge. For example the notion of the death penalty, that you should kill anyone who harms, tries to harm, or may in the future harm you, and things like that. This seems to say that there are those who feel that absolutely no one can be redeemed.

What I am wondering is in the context of Christianity is no one beyond redemption? Get the most evil person you can imagine- perhaps Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Gacy, Bundy, Manson (Charles, that is) or the most vile multiple child-killer/rapist. Are these people absolutely beyond redemption?

Does anyone know what Jesus had to say about redemption? Was He of the opinion that there were those who could not be redeemed? What does the Bible say about Redemption in general?

This is just an open discussion. I have no opinion myself on this subject.
 
Mr Manifesto said:

What I am wondering is in the context of Christianity is no one beyond redemption?
Click to expand...

Apparently Jesus thought that there was at least one act that could put you beyond redemption:

Mark 3:28-29 (NIV)
I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin.

On the other hand, the apostle Paul wrote this:

Romans 8:38-39 (NIV)
For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
 
It seems to me that the message of " no one is beyond redemption " is a theme among most Christian denominations.

It is also one of the reasons I consider Christian based philosophy to be flawed. The idea that a person can commit any number of evil acts throughout their life, then gain redemption on their deathbead and join all the 'good' people in heaven, is laughable and a clue to the true nature of the God that supposededly administers this justice.

Not to mention a monumental insult to all the 'good' people in heaven.
 
It is my understanding that most conventional Christians (i.e. people who are only nominally a member of the religion) do think that some people are beyond redemption. However, the hardcore Christians will tell that no one is beyond redemption and anyone who accepts Jesus before death will get into heaven.
 
Diogenes wrote:
It seems to me that the message of " no one is beyond redemption " is a theme among most Christian denominations.

It is also one of the reasons I consider Christian based philosophy to be flawed. The idea that a person can commit any number of evil acts throughout their life, then gain redemption on their deathbead and join all the 'good' people in heaven, is laughable and a clue to the true nature of the God that supposededly administers this justice.

Not to mention a monumental insult to all the 'good' people in heaven.

Have you ever considered the anthropological angle. It would point out that you are a *good* person based on the progression of the totallity of the elements that have made you what you are today.

So, to an anthropologist you are no better *qualitatively* than a canibal. And remember, a cannibal eats lots of people. Are you better than a cannibal?

What if you could live the life of vile people, see the misery through their eyes?

Why not consider yourself fortune that you have the luxury of your moral superiority?
 
Christian said:
Diogenes wrote:
It seems to me that the message of " no one is beyond redemption " is a theme among most Christian denominations.

It is also one of the reasons I consider Christian based philosophy to be flawed. The idea that a person can commit any number of evil acts throughout their life, then gain redemption on their deathbead and join all the 'good' people in heaven, is laughable and a clue to the true nature of the God that supposededly administers this justice.

Not to mention a monumental insult to all the 'good' people in heaven.

Have you ever considered the anthropological angle. It would point out that you are a *good* person based on the progression of the totallity of the elements that have made you what you are today.

So, to an anthropologist you are no better *qualitatively* than a canibal. And remember, a cannibal eats lots of people. Are you better than a cannibal?

 I certainly would not make that assumption..

What if you could live the life of vile people, see the misery through their eyes?

 What if pigs could fly? I'll pass on seeing life through the eyes of a vile person..

Why not consider yourself fortune that you have the luxury of your moral superiority?

Feeling judged, because I pointed out a flaw in Christian philosophy?

Try refuting my observation instead of trying to insult me.
Click to expand...
 
Diogenes wrote:
What if pigs could fly? I'll pass on seeing life through the eyes of a vile person..

So you consider the study on the psychology of criminals a futile endevour.

Feeling judged, because I pointed out a flaw in Christian philosophy?

Try refuting my observation instead of trying to insult me.

I thought I did. And, why do you feel insulted? Did I assume wrong when I concluded that you feel morally superior to criminals?


My point is simple. I see causality and you must believe it at the macrolevel (e.g. evolution). The only logical conclusion is that it is not the fault of the entity. The entity has no choice. Can a spider not act like a spider. Can a lion not hunt and kill?

Criminals are the product of causality. Why would we feel any better *qualitatively* then they.

The conclusion to this understanding is that because we are no different qualitatively, we all have an equal chance of redemption regardless of the elements that made us what we are.


Again, will you argue you are qualitatively better (superior) than a petty thief in the streets of San Salvador? Maybe if he lived in a country like yours, he would not be one.


You see, as I have said many time, there are implications to your position that you cannot escape. Once you begin condemning other human beings on the basis of their behavior, then you become that which you say does not exist (God).

Please don't confuse this type of condemnation with the legal system. It only deals with privileges, not the qualitatively values of a human being.
 
Greetings.

I agree with Christian as to this. The quote at the bottom of my post

"If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility."...H.W.Longfellow
Click to expand...

Is one of my favorites. All things are the result of causes and conditions. We look to quickly at many times at many things and wish to see only black and white, that is not the case.

Allow me 2 examples if you I use this first one with people debating their pro death/execution beliefs.


There was a man several years up for parole and it was at that time I heard his story.

Part one: This man was convicted or kidnapping several woman, beating, raping and then killing and mutilating them.

I ask the pro death/execution friend is this man should be executed. The response is always yes.

Part 2, as they say the rest of the story.

This man was kidnapped as a child ( at 5) he was used in child porn movies, raped, beaten and tortured on film and as part of his day. Passed around for most of his life, a drug addict and alcoholic by the time he was an early teen.

I ask again should this man be executed? Some do not answer, a few say no some say yes.

What else could this man be but what he was? Was any of what he did well and right? NO but
"If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility."...H.W.Longfellow
Click to expand...

This last war, Saddam ‘s 2 sons. They are beasts that is fact. But they have also known nothing else. By 12 each HAD to shoot and kill prisoners and were made to watch and then be involved in torture from young childhood. Their powerful father telling them over and over “it is kill or be killed”.

Was any of what he did well and right? NO but
"If we could read the secret history of our enemies, we should find in each man's life sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all hostility."...H.W.Longfellow
Click to expand...

Just what I believe
 
Pahansiri said:
Greetings.

.


There was a man several years up for parole and it was at that time I heard his story.

Part one: This man was convicted or kidnapping several woman, beating, raping and then killing and mutilating them.

I ask the pro death/execution friend is this man should be executed. The response is always yes.

Part 2, as they say the rest of the story.

This man was kidnapped as a child ( at 5) he was used in child porn movies, raped, beaten and tortured on film and as part of his day. Passed around for most of his life, a drug addict and alcoholic by the time he was an early teen.

I ask again should this man be executed? Some do not answer, a few say no some say yes.
Click to expand...

I would still say yes... And the people who mistreated him should be punished as well..


Have you ever heard: " Two wrongs do not make a right .."


Showing that an evil person is a victim, does not make them less evil.. It just shows they are not alone..
 
Christian said:
Diogenes wrote:


if he lived in a country like yours, he would not be one.


You see, as I have said many time, there are implications to your position that you cannot escape. Once you begin condemning other human beings on the basis of their behavior, then you become that which you say does not exist (God).
Click to expand...


But I don't condemn anyone!

It is your God and your religion that does this..

Your God creates an evil being, and then punishes it for doing what comes naturally...:rolleyes: ( Remember the Garden of Eden?)

If there is no condemnation ( for acts beyond ones control ... your beggar in SanSalvador..), then their is no need for redemption..
 
Diogenes said:


I would still say yes... And the people who mistreated him should be punished as well..


Have you ever heard: " Two wrongs do not make a right .."


Showing that an evil person is a victim, does not make them less evil.. It just shows they are not alone..
Click to expand...

Hello Diogenes I respect your belief or right to it.


You say
Have you ever heard: " Two wrongs do not make a right .."
Click to expand...

Remember I did not say what he did was right but clearly it had a cause one he was powerless at the time to stop it when it happened.

Also you believe he was wrong yet you wish to kill him, that makes your statment Hypocrisy and by such illogical.


I do not believe in "sins" or people are evil I believe they, and you and I do evil things at times. You can not say it is wrong to kill then kill someone.

By the way as to that case he asked to never be let out, I forgot to add that.

One last thing if he was your child, taken from you at 5, years later you find him after this would you sit in that court and say kill him?
Just what I believe, be well.
 
Pahansiri,

When I said ' Yes' after hearing part 2, of your story above, it was with the assumption that I had said yes to capital punishment with regard to part one, without knowing about part 2..


My point was, that if he deserved to die because of what he did, what was done to him wouldn't change that..

If he had killed his abusers, I'm sure I would not consider execution as a fitting punishment.

I think I could kill under certain circumstances, and I would be wrong if I did so.

I can't imagine killing my son, but I cannot imagine him doing something for which I would feel compelled to kill him.

But would also have to say I'm a bit biased in that regard...

I have a problem with capital punishment due to the potential and apparent misapplication of it. I would be satisfied with unqualified isolation of capital offenders from the rest of society.

I would have to stop short of trying to find any justification for their deeds..
 
Thank you for answering Diogenes


My point was, that if he deserved to die because of what he did, what was done to him wouldn't change that..
Click to expand...

But what is deserving to die? What happened to him had a great deal to do with that. The chances that he would have done what he did if he were raised in a loving home would be very low. The law does in fact allow for mental defect, such a life is a cause of mental defect.


You write
I think I could kill under certain circumstances, and I would be wrong if I did so.
Click to expand...

I am Buddhist so of course feel and believe the same. I would kill if I had to, to protect others but know fully all actions have reactions all causes have effects. Now my belief is as to karma as to rebirth but that is my belief and ask no one to believe it. But regardless there will always be an effect.


I can't imagine killing my son, but I cannot imagine him doing something for which I would feel compelled to kill him.

But would also have to say I'm a bit biased in that regard...
Click to expand...

Why not? Because he was raised in a loving home, he did not suffer what this child did?


I would have to stop short of trying to find any justification for their deeds..
Click to expand...

I do not justify it at all, I explain causes and conditions behind it. But with respect may I again ask you to answer the question.


Would you say “Yes my child should be executed” If you had the vote to break the tie what would it be?

If this man were killed what would be changed or gained?

[quote[I have a problem with capital punishment due to the potential and apparent misapplication of it. I would be satisfied with unqualified isolation of capital offenders from the rest of society.[/quote]

And it has been and often. What of the people who did not do what they were killed for? What of their loved ones do we just say “oops”. I know you do not believe in it for these reasons also. When a court system kills a being who did not do anything, should they not then be seen as killers?


How can we look into the eyes of our children and say “ killing is never right don’t kill” then we kill.

Just what I believe.
 
Pahansiri wrote:
Greetings.

I agree with Christian as to this.


I think Pahansiri has explained it much better than I. I don't think I need to add anything more.
 
Greetings my friend Christian how are the twins? Start saving for their future yet? I mean the future phone bills, twin teen girls!!!! school, 2 weddings OH MY!!! lol:eek:
 
Pahansiri said:
Thank you for answering Diogenes




But what is deserving to die? What happened to him had a great deal to do with that. The chances that he would have done what he did if he were raised in a loving home would be very low. The law does in fact allow for mental defect, such a life is a cause of mental defect.


 It is not that he deserves to die, but that the rest of society deserves to be free from his possible further evil deeds. As in my reasoning regarding redemption. I do not believe it is fair to the just, to let the unjust go unpunished.

Why not? Because he was raised in a loving home, he did not suffer what this child did?

 This would be part of it. Perhaps a great deal of it. Everyone is good or evil, for a reason

I do not justify it at all, I explain causes and conditions behind it. But with respect may I again ask you to answer the question.

Would you say “Yes my child should be executed” If you had the vote to break the tie what would it be?

 The right thing to do would be to say yes, and to kill myself as well, because I would share his guilt. I do not believe I have the courage to do that..

If this man were killed what would be changed or gained?

As mentioned before. Society would be free of the threat he presented..

Just what I believe, as well.



How can we look into the eyes of our children and say “ killing is never right don’t kill” then we kill.

Just what I believe.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom