Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

No Death Penalty. What Is Your Position?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
    so God should have specified "no imprisonment"?

    isn't that covered by the laws against kidnapping? Isn't that what imprisonment is?
    No.

    Imprisonment isn't kidnapping anymore than the death penalty is murder.
    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

    Comment


    • #92
      Originally posted by Arthur Brain View Post
      In essence, those who support the DP for adultery and homosexuality for anyone in society nowadays are religious extremists, little removed from their Islamic counterparts.

      You're a brilliant man with a keen intellect

      Comment


      • #93
        Originally posted by glassjester View Post
        No.

        Imprisonment isn't kidnapping anymore than the death penalty is murder.

        except that one is decreed by God and the other isn't

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by ok doser View Post
          except that one is decreed by God and the other isn't
          Using the internet isn't decreed by God. Is it therefore inherently evil?
          Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

          Comment


          • #95
            Originally posted by glassjester View Post
            Using the internet isn't decreed by God. Is it therefore inherently evil?
            Was imprisonment/confinement a possible choice when God gave the Law to Moses? Of course

            Was the internet? nope

            were certain aspects of using the internet that apply as well today as three thousand years ago? of course

            Comment


            • #96
              Originally posted by ok doser View Post
              Was imprisonment/confinement a possible choice when God gave the Law to Moses? Of course

              Was the internet? nope

              were certain aspects of using the internet that apply as well today as three thousand years ago? of course
              Imprisonment may have been impractical or even impossible for a people wandering in the desert.

              Anyway... Do you advocate for the death penalty for Sabbath breakers?
              Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

              Comment


              • #97
                Originally posted by glassjester View Post
                Imprisonment may have been impractical or even impossible for a people wandering in the desert.

                Anyway... Do you advocate for the death penalty for Sabbath breakers?
                There is a great need for massive prison reform. Starting with. ... using prison for ONLY those who can be reformed.
                A man you can bait with a tweet is not a man
                we can trust with nuclear weapons.

                Bill Clinton






                Comment


                • #98
                  Originally posted by glassjester View Post
                  Imprisonment may have been impractical or even impossible for a people wandering in the desert.
                  shackled and bound men can walk - the Babylonians knew this

                  Anyway... Do you advocate for the death penalty for Sabbath breakers?
                  the answer i'd like to give to the sabbath question would be more nuanced than I can handle right now, but i would like to touch on "Thou shalt have no other gods before Me" - I think it was an understandable and inevitable mistake of the founding fathers to exclude God from the constitution - one we've paid for to some degree throughout our country's history and one which we're paying for in spades today. I foresee the end of this country in my lifetime.

                  Comment


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by ok doser View Post
                    the answer i'd like to give to the sabbath question would be more nuanced than I can handle right now,
                    How do you determine which OT capital offenses are nuanced, and which aren't? God did not decree that you should do that. Perhaps doing so is inherently evil.
                    Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Rusha View Post
                      There is a great need for massive prison reform. Starting with. ... using prison for ONLY those who can be reformed.
                      How can we know with certainty who will eventually repent and who will not?
                      Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by glassjester View Post
                        How can we know with certainty who will eventually repent and who will not?
                        Repentance is not an action of man. Repentance is a work of grace performed in man by the Holy Spirit.
                        I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

                        "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

                        I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
                        A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
                        If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

                        Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

                        I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Truster View Post
                          Repentance is not an action of man. Repentance is a work of grace performed in man by the Holy Spirit.
                          Yes, and man is free to accept or reject God's gift of Grace.
                          Your "catholic" is showing. - Sozo

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by glassjester View Post
                            Yes, and man is free to accept or reject God's gift of Grace.
                            No, he is not. And once received and experienced man would die rather than agree with your utter nonsense.
                            I know Him, correctly, as Messiah whom you call Christ. Yah Shua whom you call Jesus. Messianists who you call Christians.

                            "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm".

                            I refuse, point blank, to speak peace to the unregenerate, hypocrites, religious dogma lovers and those that oppose the following statement:
                            A regenerate man trusts in the evangelism of salvation conditioned on the atoning blood and imputed justness of Messiah alone.
                            If you are fully persuaded, by experience, of this delightful, beautiful and life giving doctrine then I love you as a brother.

                            Anyone who thinks that salvation is conditioned on anything a man thinks, does or says is atheist. I cannot and will not speak peace to him or her.

                            I don't make statements online that I wouldn't repeat in front of my Maker, my grandmother or a judge.

                            Comment


                            • But he claims not to be a calvinist

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by glassjester View Post
                                I am wondering how you determine which OT laws are binding in Christians, and which are not.
                                Binding in Christians?

                                It's not about Christians, it's about human beings.

                                I brought up the adulteress of John 8 because she was caught in adultery (meaning there must have been witnesses), yet she was not executed. You've pointed out that no accusers came forward - which is true. But I'm still wondering - which OT laws/penalties do you consider binding on Christians, and which do you not? And why?
                                I'll answer your question but I don't want to just glaze over what was said about John chapter 8.

                                Why doesn't it convince you? As sure as I'm sitting here writing this, you are going to use John 8 as an argument against the death penalty the very next time you get the chance and I just want to know what else is it going to take to ever convince you that you've gotten something wrong and to stop making false arguments.

                                Jesus did not let her go because she was innocent and so your point about the existence of witnesses is moot. Jesus didn't need witnesses to know whether she was guilty or not anyway. Her guilt isn't the point. It is Jesus' actions and the motive behind those actions that is the point here. If it had been his desire to abolish the death penalty for adultery, He could have simply said as much. Of course had He done so, He'd have been in direct contradiction to Moses and everyone would have understood Him to be a fraud. No way is the Messiah going to be anti-Moses.

                                And so I ask you again, why are you unwilling to allow sound reason and perfectly reasonable explanation of the scripture to convince your mind?


                                It is my understanding that many crimes of the OT warranted the death penalty - such as: cursing one's parents, falsely presenting oneself as a virgin for marriage, blaspheming, false prophecy, breaking the sabbath, sacrificing to a false god...

                                Do you advocate for the death penalty for all of these crimes? And if not, why not?
                                Much of the Mosaic Law has to do with symbolic practices and religious rites of the Jews as well as maintaining a situation where Jews would keep themselves seperated from other nations. This had to do with maintain pure blood lines for the Messiah (i.e. fulfilling prophesies concerning the Messiah) and other issues that had specifically to do only with the nation of Israel. Such laws have no application outside that context and so could not rightly be applied to any other nation.

                                It is the laws concerning basic morality that still apply. Remember your own stated premise...
                                "Of course the moral code remains. That which was morally wrong then, remains morally wrong today."

                                As for the specific laws you listed...

                                cursing one's parents - I've stated before that this law deals with adults not small children and that there are good arguments that would indicate that this law had to do with Israel and would not apply outside Israel's special covenant with THE Father.

                                falsely presenting oneself as a virgin for marriage - the bride has had sex with a man while betrothed to another, which is adultery and she ought to be punished by stoning as the bible prescribes. We know that such a bride is not merely guilty of fornication because the law does not prescribe death for fornication.

                                blaspheming, false prophecy, breaking the sabbath, sacrificing to a false god - All of these are religious law and have no application outside of Israel's particular covenant with God.

                                One might ask how do you tell the difference between a religious law vs a moral one. There are several ways. It does take some amount of wisdom and discernment in some cases but for the most part, it's pretty obvious. One important way to tell is that moral laws cannot contradict each other the way religious laws often do. There were regulations for how to handle it when, for example, the eighth day of a child's life fell on a Sabbath. Do you circumcise (a work of the flesh) or don't you? Moral laws do not conflict in this manner. One doesn't ever find themselves having to assault their neighbor to prevent themselves from having an affair with their wife or to steal from someone to prevent having to murder them.


                                Clete
                                sigpic
                                "The [open view] is an attempt to provide a more Biblically faithful, rationally coherent, and practically satisfying account of God and the divine-human relationship..." - Dr. John Sanders

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X