ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
in which all criminal behavior is to be forgiven?
in which murderers, rapists, adulterers, thieves are to be set free with the admonishment "go and sin no more"?
What Kind Of Person Could "Execute" A Child?
- Thread starter Arthur Brain
- Start date
in which all criminal behavior is to be forgiven?
in which murderers, rapists, adulterers, thieves are to be set free with the admonishment "go and sin no more"?
That foes not change the fact that Jesus asked for an executioner.
I do not find Old Testament Christians to be inspired teachers.
I thought you were done.
No, criminal behavior is not to be forgiven. I do support the death penalty for certain crimes. I do not support the death penalty for children.
The New Testament is based on the Old Testament. When you throw out the Old, you destabilize the New, because you have removed the entire foundation on which the New was built.
Then what punishment should be given to those in the "New Covanant" who have committed a crime?
Depends on the crime, doesn't it. Adultery does not deserve the DP. Serial killers, yes, the DP is appropriate.
That is not exactly what Jesus and His apostles taught. The New washed away the Old. We love under The Golden Rule, not An Eye For An Eye. Very few understand the profound difference between the two.
What DOES it deserve?
So it's appropriate for serial killers, but not adulterers?
Scripture?
Oh? And what would that be?
But you'll have a life for multiple lives punishment for serial killers. Why not something else for serial killers? I mean, you've already gotten rid of the DP for adultery, why not get rid of it for serial killers as well?
Perhaps you could (attempt) to explain?
Last edited:
Wait a minute, Sunshine. You're the one asserting that the proper response to crime is "go and sin no more."
You justify yourself with common sense oh wait you can't because your idea is prima facie stupid.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Nope. Men can make any law they want.
Darwinists are perfectly happy in their world where "you shall murder" could be the law.
:think:
They practically do have regulations that say such.
In reality, there can never be anything but the law: "Do not murder."
Anything not in alignment with that standard is no law at all.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
This is the answer I would expect from somebody who cannot support their position from Christ's teaching. Instead of answering the question you resort to an ad hominem fallacy.
Nope. I'm not the one asserting the end of justice. That would be you. You make the claim, you defend it. :up:
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
I already have. You are trying to refute what I said. You are failing predictably.
Nope.
You've got emotionalism and spam. Nothing like an explanation.
Nope.
You make the law of no effect and you are a hypocrite.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
Town likes this argument as well. They reckon that as the woman was released, the law was overruled. What they will not do is quote the law. The law says things like:
They won't quote the law, because they know that it could not be used to correctly convict the woman.
They want Biblical justification for their rejection of justice and can only find it through emotionalism, obfuscation, nit-picking and nonsense.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
| One witness shall not rise against a man concerning any iniquity or any sin that he commits; by the mouth of two or three witnesses the matter shall be established. If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing, then both men in the controversy shall stand before the Lord , before the priests and the judges who serve in those days. And the judges shall make careful inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother; so you shall put away the evil from among you. And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot. Deuteronomy 19:15-21 NKJV |
| If a man is found lying with a woman married to a husband, then both of them shall die — the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so you shall put away the evil from Israel. Deuteronomy 22:22 NKJV |
They won't quote the law, because they know that it could not be used to correctly convict the woman.
They want Biblical justification for their rejection of justice and can only find it through emotionalism, obfuscation, nit-picking and nonsense.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
I've made my argument. John 8 is Jesus saying we should be examine our own hearts BEFORE we start casting stones about. Are you so without sin in your life that you feel you could throw the first stone at an adulterer? A homosexual? A rape victim? A virgin who lied about being a virgin? The daughter of a pastor who became a prostitute? Murder?
You constantly lead the charge for stoning people for your selected sins yet never do I ever see you speak of forgiveness in your witness nor offering same to others by way of example of God's presence in your life.
I have made my argument that Christ teaches forgiveness first. I have asked you to refute that using the New Testament to do so. Instead of pointing out scripture you resort to name calling in hopes of hiding the fact that you cannot go to the New Covenant to support your theology.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
No one here has said we shouldn't.
We're saying that after we have examined ourselves, and gotten rid of anything that if we were to judge, would cause us to be hypocrites, we should judge with righteous judgment (John 7:24).
If one is not an adulterer, he can rightly condemn such criminals.
If one is not a homo, he or she can rightly condemn such criminals.
:think: Being a rape victim is a crime? News to me.
If a woman is a virgin, she can't lie about being a virgin... :think:
If one is not a fornicator, he can rightly condemn such criminals.
If one is not a murderer, he can rightly condemn such criminals.
You constantly... well, you certainly don't lead, but you do follow in the footsteps of those who don't take the Bible seriously enough when it says to punish criminals in X way for Y crime, and then wonder why we have such a high crime rate.
If someone is not first condemned by the law, what is he to be forgiven of?
According to you, forgiveness should be superfluous. But that defeats the purpose of the law, and it even undermines the entire gospel.
Yes, you read that right. It undermines the entire gospel.
Christ taught that repentance comes before forgiveness, and if someone didn't repent, you shouldn't forgive them.
God expects that if someone comes to Him seeking forgiveness of sins, that they will repent of their wrongdoing. But the person can't know that what they've done is wrong, let alone sinful, if they haven't been shown that it's wrong. Or have you forgotten that the law is a tutor to bring someone to Christ? That's the purpose of the law, to show that someone has done wrong. If a person commits adultery, but there's no law against it on earth, then they cannot be condemned for a law that doesn't exist. But God's law does exist, and on judgment day, they will face God's wrath, because He wrote His law on their heart, and they ignored it, and broke His law. However, if there is a law against adultery here on earth, and if it's enforced, then if that person commits adultery, then they can justly be condemned, and if they're condemned, there's a 50% chance that they'll repent, even as they go to their execution. That's when the victim of that crime can forgive the criminal, only if they repent. Also, someone else cannot forgive a criminal for their crime, only God can pardon someone through Christ's blood. One can, however, forgive them of the harm they have done to you to the extent that they harmed you in the commission of their crime against someone else.
And yet...
Not one bit of the above precludes punishing the criminal for their crime. God said that judges should show no mercy to criminals.
Forgiveness is not mercy.
Except He doesn't teach "forgiveness first."
He taught if someone sins against you, REBUKE HIM. And IF HE REPENTS, forgive him.
[JESUS]Take heed to yourselves. If your brother sins against you, rebuke him; and if he repents, forgive him.And if he sins against you seven times in a day, and seven times in a day returns to you, saying, ‘I repent,’ you shall forgive him.”[/JESUS] - Luke 17:3-4 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke17:3-4&version=NKJV
You have been refuted. NEXT!
:blabla: