Podcasts

Wayne Grudem explains what the Bible says about capital punishment

3 Comments

Reformed Baptist theologian Wayne Grudem speaks on the Bible and capital punishment.

About Wayne Grudem:

Grudem holds a BA from Harvard University, a Master of Divinity from Westminster Theological Seminary, and a PhD from the University of Cambridge. In 2001, Grudem became Research Professor of Bible and Theology at Phoenix Seminary. Prior to that, he had taught for 20 years at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School, where he was chairman of the department of Biblical and Systematic Theology.

Grudem served on the committee overseeing the English Standard Version translation of the Bible, and in 1999 he was the president of the Evangelical Theological Society. He is a co-founder and past president of the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood. He is the author of, among other books, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine, which advocates a Calvinistic soteriology, the verbal plenary inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible, the body-soul dichotomy in the nature of man, and the complementarian (rather than egalitarian) view of gender equality.

The MP3 file is here.

A PDF sermon outline is here.

Topics:

  • what kinds of crimes might require CP?
  • what did God say to Noah about CP?
  • what does it mean that man is made in the image of God?
  • is CP just about taking revenge?
  • what does CP say about the value of human life?
  • does CP apply to animals, too?
  • could the statements supporting CP be understood as symbolic?
  • one purpose of CP is to protecting the public
  • another purpose of CP is to deter further wrongdoing
  • but the Biblical purpose of CP is to achieve justice by retribution
  • does the Pope make a good argument against CP?
  • what is the role of civil government in achieving retribution?
  • do people in Heaven who are sinless desire God to judge sinners?
  • should crimes involving property alone be subject to CP?
  • is the Mosaic law relevant for deciding which crimes are capital today?
  • should violent crimes where no one dies be subject to CP?
  • is CP widespread in the world? why or why not?
  • what are some objections to CP from the Bible?
  • how do you respond to those objections to CP?
  • should civil government also turn the other cheek for all crimes?
  • what is the “whole life ethic” and is it Biblical?
  • what do academic studies show about the deterrence effect of CP?
  • how often have innocent people been executed in the USA?
  • should there be a higher burden of proof for CP convictions?

I’m not a Calvinist, because I like middle-knowledge instead. But boy, have the Calvinists got some good theologians.

You can find more talks by Wayne Grudem here.

I explained how capital punishment deters future crimes using research papers here: Does the death penalty discourage crime?

News

How Obamacare took away my liberty

4 Comments

From Health Care BS. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

1. Don’t need or want a health insurance policy? Sorry, the individual mandate makes it a federal crime not to buy insurance.

2. Want to pay less in premiums by buying health insurance coverage with limits on coverage? Sorry, Obamacare also dictates how much coverage you must buy (including maternity coverage if you are a single male).

4. As an employer, you’d like to offer your employees high-deductible coverage or policies that don’t cover “children” as old as age 26? Sorry, that’s now illegal.

5. As a business-owner with 100 employees, you want to expand your sales and hire a few more people? Sorry, if you hire one more person, Obamacare requires you to buy insurance for all your employees.

6. You’re a physician and don’t want the government looking over your shoulder? Sorry, the HHS is now authorized to use your claims data to measure the resources you use.

Taking money from small businesses? That reduces the supply of jobs. Making doctors jump through hoops? That reduces the supply of doctors.

From Carrie Lukas at National Review. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

Last night, Speaker Pelosi reiterated that passing the health-care legislation means that “Being a woman will no longer be a pre-existing medical condition.” It’s true that outlawing gender ratings will effectively shift women’s health costs to men (which means young men will see their health-insurance premiums rise disproportionately). Yet the Senate bill makes being a single mom a new kind of pre-existing condition: Instead of higher insurance premiums, these women will have fewer employment opportunities. Congratulations Mrs. Speaker.

What happens when you take money away from healthy single men? They don’t marry because they can’t afford to become husbands and fathers. Government replaces men as husbands and fathers. That’s what this health care bill does.

Commentary

Are Democrats sincere when they profess to be religious?

15 Comments

Here’s an article from the American Thinker about the Mormon Harry Reid and the Catholic Nancy Pelosi. (H/T ECM)

Excerpt:

It is beyond ironic that a Mormon, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and a Catholic, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, are in charge of passing ObamaCare. If passed, the legislation will federally fund elective abortions in every state. Reid’s and Pelosi’s respective religions, both of which (at least according to the churches’ official doctrines) ardently oppose abortion, are letting them get away with it. Apparently, in this day and age, the powerful are exempt from following God’s laws.

What about Nancy Pelosi:

Nancy Pelosi, purportedly Catholic, has long been an open proponent for abortion and today is the leading champion for nationally funded abortion. Pelosi was granted an audience with the sitting Pope. The Pope merely criticized Pelosi for her position and failed to take any disciplinary action for Pelosi’s open “propaganda campaign in favor” of abortion. Meanwhile, Pelosi’s local priest in San Francisco continues to give her communion — even though the Pope has stated that those who support abortion should not take part in the Catholic sacrament.

Harry Reid has a “Temple-recommend” in the Mormon Church:

Only the most obedient of Mormons are given “temple recommends.” These recommends allow faithful members access to the Church’s sacred temple ceremonies. Harry Reid, despite his vocal and public support for legislation that provides federal funds for abortion, is known to have such a “temple recommend.”

The author of the article condemns the churches for refusing to discipline these two pro-abortionists. But I think the more significant point is that Democrats think that church is just a club. They don’t really go to Church to subject themselves to a set of moral standards and moral obligations – it’s all for show.