Should homosexuals be given the death penalty?

[lovemeorhateme]

You must have received quite a bump on your head (evidently from the scarring which was obviously created).

Poor thing -- you seem DERANGED. :Christine -> :taoist:

:chuckle:

:devil:

 

[Army of One]

OK, and how do we know exactly which punishments have been repealed?

If a woman is raped in a town, and she doesn't cry out (a hand may be over her mouth), both her and the man must be put to death. That is a sexual crime. Why do we not enforce this today?

Why would you insert that little bit into the law?

My point is, why would you assume that the law you're referring to is unjust by inserting that bit that I've highlighted? People reading God's Law must use common sense! And to answer your question: We should still enforce that law today (i.e. Rape and Adultery should be Capital Crimes!)

 

[lovemeorhateme]

My point is, why would you assume that the law you're referring to is unjust by inserting that bit that I've highlighted? People reading God's Law must use common sense! And to answer your question: We should still enforce that law today (i.e. Rape and Adultery should be Capital Crimes!)

Even the VICTIM of a rape?

 

[Annabel Lee]

:kookoo:

Yes, after reading Vera Carp's tripe I seemed have gotten off the bus and ended up in the psycho ward.

 

[lovemeorhateme]

Yes, after reading Vera Carp's tripe I seemed have gotten off the bus and ended up in the psycho ward.

WTF?

You are a nutcase!

:yawn:

 

[Army of One]

Even the VICTIM of the rape?

:doh: No! The point of the law is that if it was consensual (she did not resist), then it is Adultery (the text specifically states that the woman is either married or betrothed to be married). Please, try using common sense instead of automatically assuming that God is unjust.:nono:

 

[Army of One]

WTF?

You are a nutcase!

:yawn:

In case you haven't noticed, Annabel Lee is mocking Vera.

 

[Lighthouse]

20:13

Waiting for another verse about putting homosexuals to death, dude.

Leviticus 18:2-29
"22Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind: it is abomination. 23Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith, neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. 24"`Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things, for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you, 25and the land is defiled. Therefore I do visit the iniquity thereof upon it, and the land itself vomiteth out her inhabitants. 26Ye shall therefore keep My statutes and My judgments, and shall not commit any of these abominations, neither any of your own nation nor any stranger who sojourneth among you 27(for all these abominations have the men of the land done, who were before you, and the land is defiled), 28that the land spew not you out also when ye defile it, as it spewed out the nations that were before you. 29For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls who commit them shall be cut off from among their people."

 

[Annabel Lee]

In case you haven't noticed, Annabel Lee is mocking Vera.

Thank you!

 

[Army of One]

Thank you!

No problem.

 

[CRASH]

.......

Why are you trying to change the subject. Can you or can you not see that the death penalty is a very loving law given by God to deter people from choosing the miserable, destructive and deadly homo lifestyle?

 

[Lighthouse]

ok, ya I was a Lesbo and stopped and now follow Jesus.. I was a whore also but stopped and follow Jesus..

remember when Jesus spoke to the adultrerous and said "stop sinning"?

I do not agree with people who love the same sex.. but pray they will turn around as I did.. and sure many have..

Beautiful!:kiss:

 

[ThankYouJesus]

Beautiful!:kiss:

why thank you BIG BOY :kiss: LOL.. thanks.. it was a joke.. now people are gonna call me lesbo.. oh well..

 

[Lighthouse]

But it only advocates the death penalty in the OT. The NT says homosexuality is wrong, so it is wrong, but the NT does not ask for the execution of homosexuals.

And the NT does not advocate the death penalty for murderers or rapists either. Does that mean that they should not be put to death, either?

 

[Evee]

But it only advocates the death penalty in the OT. The NT says homosexuality is wrong, so it is wrong, but the NT does not ask for the execution of homosexuals.

Right!!

 

[Vera Carp]

God is not mocked.

God is not mocked.

Thank you!

You do remember what happened to the boys who mocked Elijah (2 Kings 2:23-24).

Of course not. You're a liberal, and liberals don't believe the Bible; therefore, you don't believe in God.

Well, God sent a bear to kill the children for mocking His prophet.

You might want to be very, very careful what you do for the next few days.

What is the phrase you all use? Oh, yes: "Blessed be..." :cheers:

God's Law is Clear -- The Penalty Severe!!!​

 

[Clete]

Strangely, that's not at all my motivation, and I very much feel that my reading of scripture IS the plain one.

When Christ said he came not to destroy the law, but to fulfill it, What precisely does he mean by that? How does one "fulfill the law"? How I read this is actually quite simple. The entirety of the mosiac law represents a covenant between God and Isreal. Isreal was to obey a specific set of laws and in exchange God would bless them use them to bring the Messiah into the world to be a blessing to all nations. Once this was completed, the convenant and by extension it's laws, were fulfilled and completed. This doesn't then render those things forbidden in the law moral, but it does end the system of specific legal rules and associated penalties. Hence, homosexuality is still immoral, but it can no longer said God requires the death penalty for it.

Your logic doesn't follow. Even if everything you've said prior to the final sentence was correct (which it isn't but too far off topic to debate here) how would it lead to the conclusion that the crime is no longer worthy of death? Romans says explicitly that those guilty of such things deserve death and that was after Jesus had come and gone (not that the incarnation is a valid argument to negate God's law but I'm simply applying your own reasoning for the sake of argument).

The problem with this argument is that it presupposes a God of pragmatic rather than absolute morality. However...

No it doesn't you simply are missing the point. We aren't talking about just some Joe Smow Jewish guy who found his way into the Bible somehow. Jesus has the authority to show mercy if and when He decides it is appropriate to do so. Delaying judgment of this woman so as to defeat the intentions of His enemies would be more than sufficient reason for Him to have done so here.

Is the much better answer, without giving all the implications of Jesus acting according a pragmatic rather aboslute morality.

Mercy triumphs over judgment Urizen. There is no problem with Jesus having shown this woman mercy for whatever reason. He isn't even required to explain Himself to us.

Leviticus 25: 44-46
44 " 'Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can will them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly.

Interesting, I hadn't noticed this passage before. I found the following comment concerning Biblical slavery which is appropriate here...

Every seven years, there was a cancellation of debt. Since the unbeliever is by nature a slave, he is not released from debt (Deuteronomy 15:1-6). A thief who did not make restitution was sold as a slave (Exodus 22:3). A man could also be sold for debt (Deuteronomy 15:12). The servitude ceased when labor had been performed equivalent to the amount which would have been required to make restitution, and it is limited to six years. A man could renounce his liberty and make himself a slave. He was then set free on the sabbath year. If he chose the security of slavery, his ear was pierced, to indicate that he was now like a woman, permanently in subjection, and he remained a slave (Exodus 21:5-7). Since unbelievers are by nature slaves, they could be held as life-long slaves without this formality (Leviticus 25:44-45).

Since the slave was, except where debt and theft were concerned, a slave by nature and by choice, a fugitive slave went free, and the return of such fugitives was forbidden (Deuteronomy 23:15-16). Source​

Notice that Leviticus 25:44-45 refer to Gentiles (i.e. non-Jews). Thus this particular law has to do with distinguishing between the Jewish nation and everyone else. There is no longer any distinction between Jew and Gentile and thus this law would no longer apply. It had to do with the nation Israel not with morals.

As I stated before because the specific civic laws of the Mosiac law are no longer in force, I feel it is no longer a requirement to carry out the specific civic penalities associated with those laws. This doesn't make homosexuality moral, as it's immortality is attested to in other parts of scripture as well, it just removes the particular civic penalty.

This also doesn't follow! How does it follow that homoism is still immoral but that it is no longer a crime? Where do we read in the Bible about the decriminalization of homoism?

Where, in scripture, is the Mosaic law actually broken down into specific categories like that?

It isn't. One must read it and figure it out. It is rather straight forward though. If the law had to do with issues of morality then there is no reason to think that they shouldn't still be enforced. If, on the other hand, the law has something to do specifically with the nation of Israel (i.e. the symbolic and religious laws in particular) then since there is no longer Jew or Gentile then they would no longer apply. It's simple really, at least in most cases it is. I mean there is of course some issues that are more difficult to figure out than others but for the most part it couldn't be easier.

Resting in Him,
Clete

 

[Clete]

And what says that they should still be capital crimes? Unless one can be 100% sure, then one cannot enforce the death penalty, as the onus must always be on life.

Who wants to bet me that homolover here supports a woman's right to murder her unborn children?

 

[Annabel Lee]

You do remember what happened to the boys who mocked Elijah (2 Kings 2:23-24).

Of course not. You're a liberal, and liberals don't believe the Bible; therefore, you don't believe in God.

Well, God sent a bear to kill the children for mocking His prophet.

You might want to be very, very careful what you do for the next few days.

What is the phrase you all use? Oh, yes: "Blessed be..." :cheers:

God's Law is Clear -- The Penalty Severe!!!​

Are you threatening me, Carp?

 

[Army of One]

Are you threatening me, Carp?

I believe she is, and with a bear no less. :chuckle: