| We hope you enjoy your visit! You're currently viewing Catholic CyberForum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our online cyberparish, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! Messages posted to this board must be polite and free of abuse, personal attacks, blasphemy, racism, threats, harrassment, and crude or sexually-explicit language. If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| The crucified thieves | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Monday, 23. August 2010, 21:11 (273 Views) | |
| pete | Monday, 23. August 2010, 21:11 Post #1 |
|
Rose touched on this on another thread, and rather than go off topic I thought it worthy of a thread of its own. I wonder how serious the crime was for 2 men to have suffered such an agonising death. Could they have stolen in order to feed their families in order to strive off starvation? Or were they out and out baddies. Considering in the 19 century in this civilized country of ours, a person could be deported for stealing a loaf of bread. For 2 men to steal a sheep they would both be hung and their families flung into the workhouse. Could it be that the 2 men crucified with Our Lord may have committed a lesser act of thievery than stealing a sheep? |
![]() |
|
| PJD | Monday, 23. August 2010, 22:31 Post #2 |
|
Point well made Pete PJD |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:03 Post #3 |
|
All we know is that they did something the civil authorities didn't approve of and the civil authorities regarded themselves as having the right to get rid of them for that. Christ caused something of a revolution by teaching that that thinking was actually wrong. The early Christians followed this teaching for the first three centuries or so. Then their leaders got a chance to grab some of that civil power for themselves and seem to have decided that casting aside the teaching of Jesus and going with along with the civil authorities was a worthwhile price. |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:05 Post #4 |
|
Not just a "civilized" country, Pete, a country that actually prided itself on its Christianity. |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:21 Post #5 |
![]()
Administrator
|
In different Catholic versions of the Bible the two are called bandits, thieves, robbers, revolutionaries. All we know is that in their society their crimes were regarded as serious. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Monday, 23. August 2010, 23:22 Post #6 |
![]()
Administrator
|
In England it took nearly two thousand years for attitudes to change. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 00:07 Post #7 |
![]()
Administrator
|
Theft of a horse used to be a capital offence in USA (in cowboy days) because without his horse a man could be unable to earn his living. Whatever our views about executing thieves, see what the "good thief" said
The man was of the opinion he himself deserved to be crucified. The Jews said Jesus had blasphemed and must pay the penalty, but this man said Jesus had done nothing wrong. Was he more astute than the people who called for Barabbas to be freed and Jesus crucified? |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| pete | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 00:12 Post #8 |
|
To steal a loaf of bread to feed your starving kids, here too that was considered serious. Injustice was blatantly rife, more evil than the crimes themselves in the majority of cases. People were hanged for petty crimes and this is 1,800 years after the crucifixion of the 2 thieves. If the judge didn’t like the colour of your eyes, that could be enough, or to be Irish or a Jew that too might decide your destiny. His Honour the judge was not answerable to anyone. After saying all that, the scales have now tilted the other way. If the 2 thieves were to go to court today their parents would probably be to blame or the environment they grew up in. They would by law get legal aid, have words put into their mouths by a cleaver lawyer and walk laughing from the court. The moral of the story is the 2 thieves were born in the wrong century. |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 08:47 Post #9 |
|
All we know is that their crimes were regarded as serious by those who had invaded their country and ruled their society by forcible violence. |
![]() |
|
| Gerard | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 08:51 Post #10 |
|
Anyone know what Greek word is actually used - and possible translations? Gerry |
| "The institutional and charismatic aspects are quasi coessential to the Church's constitution" (Pope John Paul II, 1998). | |
![]() |
|
| Mairtin | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 08:52 Post #11 |
|
That seems a lot nearer to what Jesus wanted when He said that if somebody steals our coat, we should give them our tunic as well. |
![]() |
|
| pete | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 11:31 Post #12 |
|
I wonder what Our Lord would have to say about identity theft? If someone clears out your Lloyds bank account, give them your Abbey savings account details as well
|
![]() |
|
| Rose of York | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 11:59 Post #13 |
![]()
Administrator
|
In those days a man who had a tunic and a coat was rich. It may be that the thief stole the coat because he was so poor he was in dire need. It is wrong to steal, but surely Jesus is saying do not follow the old law "an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth". We must not seek vengeance.
We must seek to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect. If I catch a person stealing bread from my kitchen, and I have reason to believe that person has no money, and no food, and is desperate with hunger, I should offer more food, sufficient for the day. the least I can do is give more food, to add to the bread, to make a sandwich. I admit that if I offered more food, the thief would have to eat it away from my house, I would not put myself in danger. Clearing out your Lloyds bank account, is motivated by greed it is not done out of necessity to provide for today. Rather than seek violent vengeance we report that person to police, let them deal with it. We know a thief will not be executed. If the authorities do not deal effectively with crime, that is another matter, they are at fault. |
|
Keep the Faith! | |
![]() |
|
| OsullivanB | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 12:23 Post #14 |
|
Matthew and Mark both use "lestai" - robbers/plunderers/pirates; Luke says "kakourgoi" - criminals/thieves/robbers; John just says "alloi" - others. The lexicon used is the magisterial one by Liddell and Scott - sixth edition 1869. Edited by OsullivanB, Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 12:24.
|
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| OsullivanB | Tuesday, 24. August 2010, 12:36 Post #15 |
|
Not if the Jewish Encyclopedia is correct. It is the best source I can find and accords with what I remember from reading about the penalty of crucifixion under the Romans.
Read more: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.jsp?artid=905&letter=C#ixzz0xWR7kgYo |
| "There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation." Herbert Spencer | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Archived Discussions · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2







7:54 PM Jul 11