Should Christians punish others for their "victimless" sins?

[JitC]

note: In order to comply with rules given to me by blackeyedpeas, I will not be debating about a specific type of sin. So this debate is more of a general debate about sins. I am NOT trying to debate about two types of sins specifically, as in a previous debate. I am speaking about all "victimless" sins.
When I say "victimless" I don't mean to imply that their are no victims. Obviously, indirectly their are victims to every sin. What I mean "victimless" to represent are those things that are sins against God and the person/people committing the sin.
I would rather not use the word "victimless", because I really don't want to get into a debate about how nothing is victimless, but I don't know of any other way to ask the question, and still comply with rules set forth by blackeyedpeas. So please just bear with the word "victimless".

Should Christians be involved in punishing others for their "victimless" sins?

[JitC]

I vote no. I think that it's God's job.

I am in no way defending sin. Sin is wrong without question. Neither did Jesus in any way defend sin. The hypocrites of His day probably counted what He did as defending sin, but we know that's not what He did. He did however defend sinners from punishment. That is the basis for my position. If Jesus defended sinners from punishment, then should we still be involved in punishing?

[Shammu]

Should Christians be involved in punishing others for their "victimless" sins?

NO, that is Gods job. We should be praying for their salvation. I also disagree with the title of, "victimless" sins." For all who sin fall short, of the glory of God. There is no such thing as a "victimless" sins."

[nChrist]

JitC,

You still don't have a premise for your argument, even after removing your intended topics. First, you already have it right that there are NO victim-less sins or victim-less crimes. This should be more than enough but there is much more.

Answer these questions and you will have all your answers without any mumbo jumbo or theological distortions:

Does the Holy Bible authorize government and laws of men?
(Obviously YES - Specifically)

If the government and laws of men include Biblical teaching, does the Holy Bible teach there is anything wrong with this?
(Obviously NO)

So, the above answers a plethora of questions, especially considering that many of man's laws were and are based on Biblical teaching. It's not much of a secret that Biblical teaching adopted by government and society works very well. In the case of America, many of our laws actually listed Chapter and Verse from the Holy Bible as the authority for the law.

You've twisted the question around so that it isn't recognized. You have veiled the real question, and here it is:

Can the government of states and countries make laws that are based on the Holy Bible and enforce them? Can this government exact a punishment or fine for a violation of these laws. The obvious answer is YES!!! and YES!! Lastly, is there anything in the Holy Bible that even HINTS that government can't do this?  The obvious answer is NO!!!

Further, you won't find any requirement in the Holy Bible for governments to accept, tolerate, and OK evil. That's where you really wanted to go originally, but it was pretty upside-down and inside-out.

Tom

[Evangelist]

Well said, BEP. ATA!!!

Also, it is not Christians who punish others...it is society, and as well noted by BEP, society and its laws are deriviations of God-ordained authority.

Rom 13:1
Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.

Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.

For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:

For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.

[JitC]

Does the Holy Bible authorize government and laws of men?

Yes, in the old covenant for the Israelites. During the time of the old covenant, God did not give laws to anyone, except through Moses as part of a covenant to the Israelites.

Even if people copy the words of Moses’ laws, they are still man’s laws, because the laws that are copied are laws for the Israelites during the old covenant.

There are laws that we should live by, but they are not the type of laws that allow us to condemn others. Paul wrote: “Of course, I myself have laws. I follow the laws of Christ.” - (1 Cor 9:21) (i.e. not the laws of Moses, but of the New Covenant)

Jesus said not to judge others.  - (Matt 7:1)

When the scribes and Pharisees brought to Jesus a woman who had committed adultery, they said “Now Moses, in the law, commanded us…” (John 8:3) They didn‘t feel she should be let off the hook. She was a sinner, and she should be punished. But Jesus knew we shouldn’t be the ones to punish others, at least not now that there is a New Covenant. He spoke of people being condemned for sins, but not by people. He spoke of God condemning them. So He told them that if they were without sin, then they could punish her. But nobody is without sin. So we have no God given right to condemn others. Not even Jesus was willing to condemn her. He said: “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” - (John 8:11) After saying “sin no more”, He didn’t say “or else I’ll approve of them stoning you.”

We want to punish others. But it’s our want, not God’s.

The simple truth is that Jesus didn't condemn sinners, so neither should we.

[nChrist]

JitC,

Maybe you can find a country with laws that you agree with, but I doubt it. I was a police officer for 25 years, and I agree with the laws for many reasons, many you wouldn't have a clue about. I was not the judge, jury, and executioner, but I did bring many to justice under the laws of our state and country. I didn't have any problems with the laws you want to do away with. In fact, the opposite is true, and I might add that a host of other Christian police officers felt the same way.

"Anything goes" and "If it feels good - do it" make for an ugly and disgusting place that isn't decent to raise children in. You can vote to legalize all kinds of things, and I can vote to keep the law or establish new ones. That's America, and you can take it to the bank that the vast majority of Christians will never rubber stamp evil as OK, "Anything goes", and "If it feels good - do it". If the law happens to be in agreement with the Holy Bible, that just makes for a bolder check mark for "YES" on the voting ballot for me.

JitC, you really don't have a point at all. Vote your conscience and however you feel led to vote, and I will do the same. In the meantime, I hope that you aren't expecting any type of grassroots movement among Christians to join you. Actually, the opposite will be true.

Tom

[JitC]

...the laws you want to do away with.

I think you're trying to make me out to be someone I'm not in order to turn the topic away from the fact that Christians aren't to judge. I didn't say I wanted to do away with laws. I simply think it's not a Christian's place to be involved in condemning others.

...the vast majority of Christians will never rubber stamp evil as OK.

Again, you're trying to make it sound as though I agree with evil simply because I don't think it's a Christian's place to condemn others.

[felix102]

Knowing what you originally had in mind before you began this topic, I can address it "Should Christians punish other for their 'victimless' sin." I guess what you meant by "victimless" sin are sins that don't harm other people. Is that right? Well, what these sins are are sexual sins. There are sins that can be committed outside the body and ones commited inside.

Flee from sexual immorality. All other sins a man commits are outside his body, but he who sins sexually sins againt his own body.
1 Corintinas 6:18

Sins commited outside the body usually hurt other people. It is sexual sins that hurt your own body.

Take real big note of this: it is so clearly evident that God is punishing sexual sins (or what you would be refering  to "victimless" sin)

Statistically, homosexuals take a large percentage of those who are affected with HIV and have AIDS. Multiple sexual partners greatly increase their chances of getting AIDS.

There are many many many dieseases that are transmitted sexually (STDs). And in most of those dieseases...does it not seem apparent that they sort of punish a person for being sexually immoral? For the most part, it would make the person regret what they did. Sexual sins hurt your own body, and so it is; the people are being punished by God.


BUT, as Christians we should admonish those who are committing sexual sins. "A man who despises the rod is foolish" -proverbs   Just like losing a part of your body is better than for your whole body to go to hell: it is better for a person to be punished externally than to suffer AIDS, a punishment they will suffer for the rest of their life. "God disciplines those he loves" As Christians -because we should have God-like love- should discipline those who are lost. Punishment is just negative way to say discipline in this case. We punish not out of anger, revenge, or personal gratification BUT out of LOVE.

[JitC]

I guess what you meant by "victimless" sin are sins that don't harm other people. Is that right?

Yes.

Well, what these sins are are sexual sins.

For the most part, yes. But there are others, like getting drunk for example.

We punish not out of anger, revenge, or personal gratification BUT out of LOVE.

Firstly, I think that is a much more acceptable aproach. More like preventing somebody from harming themselves, rather than punishing them for it. Hypothetically I might agree. But, at least with the prison conditions as they are today, preventing somebody from sinning by throwing them into prison where they will be far worse off just can't be called love.
Secondly, I don't know who "we" is refering to. Did you mean to put a "should" between "we" and "punish"?

[felix102]

There are laws that we should live by, but they are not the type of laws that allow us to condemn others.

Is this your main point? I think we can help you out with what you have in mind if you tell us what experience lead to this thought. As I have assumed in the previous, you are refering to sexually immorality. The events that could have lead you to this could be the Gay marriage controversy?? Correct me if I am wrong, but this is what lead you here.

First question is: Should Christians support laws against Gay marriage? Yes.

What you are asking is this...
Should Christians support laws that punish others for "victimless sins" (ie gay marriages)?
Should Christians punish others for their "victimless sins"?
Is it right for Christians to be proactively involved in a law that is against "victimless sins"?

If I said yes to those questions that would make Christians seem wrong. This is because these questions have the wrong connotations with the wrong implications. The answer is Yes.


Why should a Christian support laws against gay marriages? (This is the primary question) A Christian should support it because it is an abomination to God. A Christian should support it because he/she knows the consequences of Sodom and Gommorah. A Christian should support it because he/she knows that on earth Satan rules this world and Christians as the light of the world should do anything to thwart the plans of the devil.

A Christian would support it because it follows God's law. A Christian would support it because it will keep them from being tempted into that sin. A Christian would support it because it will prevent punishment from God for sexual sins. A Christian would support it because he/she loves their neighbor and knows that such a thing would destroy those who are lost.

 

[felix102]

For the most part, yes. But there are others, like getting drunk for example.

Didn't catch that before, I see that there are many other things that can be classified as the "victimless sins." Again, those would be sins commited against the body. Seems that drugs and excessive acohol are bad for the body too and the person's punishment is readily appparent. I have not found a direct addressment to this in the bible, but I believe this is because with sexual immorality the person does not know that indulgence in their activity will have consequences. Whereas with substances such as drugs and acohol the health affects are known. In either way, a person suffers for commiting any of those.

Secondly, I don't know who "we" is refering to. Did you mean to put a "should" between "we" and "punish"?

I meant it as it was. 'We' is refering to Christians. I am sure that some Christians will judge and condemn people by using laws as their crutch and authority. God would not approve; that would not be Christ-like.

You were talking about prisons. It does not seem like love.

The government may seem harsh but to enforce most laws, there usually is no alternative but imprisonment or a money fine. EVen so, a law against gay marriages would more pratically be a ban against it so that it cannot be practice. It would be more like a 14 year old buying cigarettes. The minor would be unable to buy them. Or the seller would be punished for selling to a minor.    

A christian should support a law yet also pray/help those who violate it.

Hope this helps you!

[JitC]

There are laws that we should live by, but they are not the type of laws that allow us to condemn others.

Is this your main point?

Yes. Christians are to live by the laws of Christ. There are things we are supposed to do, and there are things we aren't. But I don't believe we are to be involved in condemning others.

I think we can help you out with what you have in mind if you tell us what experience lead to this thought.

After reading the New Testament over and over, I realized the vast amount of hypocrisy in todays churches. Combine that with the fact that I enjoy debate, and that's why I'm here.

The events that could have lead you to this could be the Gay marriage controversy??

No.

I don't believe Christians have a God given right to punish them for what they do, but I don't think they should get certificates of approval for it either.

BTW felix102, I just modified my previous post.

[2nd Timothy]

Perhaps you should study this passage a bit.  It states that not only are we to be subject to authority, but in fact support it.  Note that authority is an avenger of Gods wrath to wrong doers here.

Rom 13:1  Let every soul be subject to higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, but the existing authorities have been ordained by God.
Rom 13:2  So that the one resisting authority has opposed the ordinance of God, and the ones opposing will receive judgment to themselves.
Rom 13:3  For the rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the bad. And do you desire not to fear the authority? Do the good, and you will have praise from it;
Rom 13:4  for it is a servant of God to you for the good. But if you practice evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword in vain; for it is a servant of God, an avenger for wrath to the one practicing bad things.
Rom 13:5  Because of this, it is necessary to be subject, not only on account of wrath, but also on account of conscience.
Rom 13:6  For on this account you also pay taxes, for they are ministers of God, always giving attention to this very thing.

We are to support it in subjection and tax.  Does this make us partakers in condemnation in our support?   Me thinks it does, and Paul says to do it.

Grace and Peace!

[Shammu]

Perhaps you should study this passage a bit.  It states that not only are we to be subject to authority, but in fact support it.  Note that authority is an avenger of Gods wrath to wrong doers here.

Rom 13:1  Let every soul be subject to higher authorities, for there is no authority except from God, but the existing authorities have been ordained by God.
Rom 13:2  So that the one resisting authority has opposed the ordinance of God, and the ones opposing will receive judgment to themselves.
Rom 13:3  For the rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the bad. And do you desire not to fear the authority? Do the good, and you will have praise from it;
Rom 13:4  for it is a servant of God to you for the good. But if you practice evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword in vain; for it is a servant of God, an avenger for wrath to the one practicing bad things.
Rom 13:5  Because of this, it is necessary to be subject, not only on account of wrath, but also on account of conscience.
Rom 13:6  For on this account you also pay taxes, for they are ministers of God, always giving attention to this very thing.

We are to support it in subjection and tax.  Does this make us partakers in condemnation in our support?   Me thinks it does, and Paul says to do it.

Grace and Peace!

Great post 2T.