Skip to main content

Visiting the prisoners

   Some people have wondered if they should have been visiting people that they knew were prisoners. One place in the Scriptures that gives us the affirmative on the question is Matthew 25:31-46 when Jesus describes the Final Judgment. The whole passage is recommended reading, but I will point out to everyone here the snippets that are relevant. Jesus said about the righteous (in Matthew 25:38-40), that they will say, "When did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You? ’The King will answer and say to them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me." Then He described about the unrighteous (in Matthew 25:44-46), that they will say,  "Lord, when did we see You hungry, or thirsty, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not take care of You?’ Then He will answer them, ‘Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ These will go away into eternal punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”
   The answer is "yes," obviously people should be visiting the prisoners. If there is a controversial case, then all the more is it the case of the matter that you should visit the prisoner. Apply the Golden Rule. If you were in the middle of a difficult problem, then you would require more help or attention. To the extent of the difficulty is the extent that someone needs others to help. I think it's safe to say from those verses that it is a dividing line issue. 
   Cases might become controversial if the defendant actually has a defense to provide the court, meaning his or her imprisonment then looks even more unfair, causing more opposition even. If they have no defense, they actually committed the crime, and the case is not controversial, the above verses still seem to indicate that people should visit the prisoner.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Night Fever," new song of mine could have many biblical implications

    Many people think of going to do something for the Lord like the preach the gospel, but will they really consider what the backlash would or could be like against them in many forms?     During my years of preaching with and alongside Third Street Ministries the typical level of discomfort normally experienced was just the prodding of scoffers and mockers in the mission field. It was kept from encroaching on our personal lives for an extended time, even despite posting videos. My testimony would indicate just how cautious, circumspect, and in agreement with your fellow believers you have to be in order to avoid a problem. That is especially true if you are working at the "trenches" level of confronting the unbelieving world.     In this new song "Night Fever," I just describe in vague terms one day in July 2011 when my ministry efforts with them finally got derailed more seriously. Tom of 1tmoch fame called my cellphone (or we called each othe...

Apologies to the Trump Campaign

   I received your messages (Donald Trump and son), I just haven't checked that email account often enough. I am well aware that someone with you follows my posts here, ever since my original idea to have a wealthy man run for President has come to fruition somehow. The only thing I would have to communicate is that this was never supposed to be a purely political blog. I started the blog to write about whatever I wanted to, or whatever I was interested in. The "general topic" theme gives me the freedom to write freely across subject areas. If my ideas have helped you somehow, I did not realize that. Let me see what I can do to help you further, though. I think you should continue giving America a message of hope based on ideas and values our country was founded on, and you won't be able to really go wrong. Too often Democrats win elections not by their own merit, but by a smear campaign against their opponent. That's what they've tried to do, it looks like. ...

War on the Poor or Helpful Heart of Republican President?

     I was surprised to see an article today in the Washington Post saying that President Trump was declaring as a result of his visit to California, that he wanted to take federal action to clean up homeless encampments in Los Angeles and San Francisco. I was personally stunned at the vitriol against said "homeless," but also by the fact of the matter that his proposed action as leaked by insiders is liberal in nature. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-homeless-people-hurt-the-prestige-of-los-angeles-san-francisco/2019/09/17/71e71b9e-d982-11e9-ac63-3016711543fe_story.html    In truth, I don't really have a problem with him trying to set up a better place for the tenants of Skid Row in Los Angeles. I just don't understand how it is a federal matter. I'd be really more comfortable with the effort if The President would arrange for legislation for block grants to be passed down to local governments to address these problems as they see fit. His pro...