- This topic has 39 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 7 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
@ethryndal If you weren’t an elf, you should make that your profile pic. 😛
☀ ☀ ☀ ENFP ☀ ☀ ☀
@Dragon-Snapper Arg, you had to sway my Elven convictions. I’m sorry, Galadriel. I’ll repent in a few days.
INTJ ➸Your friendly neighborhood mastermind. ➸https://thesarcasticelf.wordpress.com/
@ethryndal That is too awesome. I’m going to go half-laugh and half-do history. 😅😂😄
☀ ☀ ☀ ENFP ☀ ☀ ☀
@Dragon-snapper *bows* At your services! 😀
INTJ ➸Your friendly neighborhood mastermind. ➸https://thesarcasticelf.wordpress.com/
I see, that all makes sense. So the only thing that makes it justice and not revenge is if the person exacting the justice is working within a judicial system organized by other people? Where does their authority to have someone executed come from? (Of course, I don’t know that this it’s practical to take it all the way to the roots, but I’d like a full understanding. =P)
On a side note, it would be an interesting story idea for someone to become a judge for the purpose of exacting their revenge when it came time to review their enemy’s case… XD
Also, what about those rules in Joshua (I think) about people being allowed to hunt down and kill someone who killed someone in their family, even if it was an accident? That’s not the new testament of course, and it was only the law for the Jews, I think, but it makes me wonder why God allowed that if He was going to exact the vengeance… I dunno, just trying to figure it out. =P
Also, what if you have a person who exacts revenge not so much out of anger, but out of a sense of justice? What if they track down a terrible person who keeps slipping from the law and kill them out of a mixture of justice and revenge? Is it wrong to take justice into our own hands? I guess this ties into being a vigilante. Is that wrong? XD I’m so full of gray-area questions today.
@Rachelle not at all. 😀 Intellectual stimulation is definitely encouraged. XD
It’s actually pretty simple. Justice stems from the government/judicial system because the government/judicial system is in charge of seeing justice done in God’s name— punishing the wicked and protecting the righteous. That is the whole purpose of a government boiled down into a nutshell. If an ordinary citizen, acting expressly outside the law, takes justice into his own hands, he’s usurped a position he was never meant to fill.
As for a vigilante, and the case of the judge who may administer justice from personal feelings of revenge, here it boils down to a heart issue. One can act completely and to the last letter within the law and still be sinning. Have you read The Count of Monte Cristo? It’s worth remarking that while the hero, Edmond Dantes, used nothing but the wickedness of his enemies to bring them down, he did it from a wrong heart. So while in the eyes of the world and the law he did well, before God he did evil, because he acted out of hatred.
Thoughts?
That makes sense. What if the government is corrupted or has strayed from that purpose? What if the offender is let free because of a bribe or something, and you know that they’re going to do something terrible, but the corrupted authorities refuse to act? Is it wrong to step into the role that isn’t being properly filled in this case?
I’ve watched that movie, and yes, I was always conflicted about all that ending stuff, but I never knew why. XD
So if a guy shoots your family and gets away with it, is it wrong to find him and shoot him? Is the difference only in the motive? Whether it’s justice or revenge? If the law let him go, are you supposed to just let him go too? (Or is this where the vengeance of God comes in?) But what if you know they’re going to kill more people?I just know some people who have absolutely no problem with someone coming up to a murderer and shooting them for justice/revenge. And I can’t decide what I think on it. XD Something seems off, but I can’t figure out what. Logically, that seems like a perfectly fine solution to the problem, but I can’t shake the idea that it shouldn’t be fine for some reason. XD
@Rachelle I actually haven’t seen the movie. 😛
Ahhhh… the corrupt government. *grins* The age old debate. To rebel or not to rebel? That is the question. XD
I personally believe that any citizen taking justice into their own hands against the law is not acceptable whether or not the government is corrupt. God only ever said that it was the government’s job to punish the wicked. He never made any specifications that I’m aware of as to whether or not the government was to be a law-abiding one (oh boy what a paradox that presents 😛 ) or corrupt. The nature of a Christian’s moral duty is not conditional to the morality of those around them. God isn’t hampered in His work by the corruption of man, even when they are supposedly His ministers.For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 8:38-39I definitely don’t have a problem with law abiding citizens capturing criminals (say someone attacks your daughter) and turning them over into the hands of the law, but that is the extent of their authority.
@kate-flournoy
Haha, I guess we’ve got the best of both worlds here, then! =DHm, yes, I can see that. I guess this is where the debate comes in about turning the other cheek too. =P Like, if you capture the guy who keeps trying to kidnap your daughter, and turn him over to the authorities, but they’re corrupt and just keep letting him go, saying he “just needs another chance” or maybe they were bribed (for whatever reason), do you just keep your daughter close and hope he never succeeds? Can you do nothing to protect your family from the guy?
I guess I wonder how far it goes that you’re not supposed to take on roles that people aren’t filling properly that affect you… Maybe it’s forever. =P Interesting thought.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.