Where is the part about bratty children?
Gay Oppression?
- Thread starter Crucible
- Start date
Where is the part about bratty children?
You would not have made it out of Israel if they listened to God. That is what I have to say.
He didn't mean it when he said her sins were forgiven. See how that works you demon possessed pervert?
Quote mining huh, here this will help you understand those verses:
https://erikbrewer.wordpress.com/2011/12/14/bible-teaching-rude-children-punishment/
Those aren't about small children like atheists and others too weak to even look up a commentary on what they don't understand, or even have any context or history on.
[MENTION=13737]aCultureWarrior[/MENTION] the article presented above is what I was getting at in the other thread wjere you and I were discussing this passage. I DON'T think it's right to immediately stone someone's children (and I use that term loosely) if they disobey their parents. But if they have been given plenty of chances to repent, and remain stubborn and rebellious, then yes, they should be tried and executed.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Forget being convicted of a capital crime,
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/capital+offense
just go ahead and stone them because they're stubborn and rebellious?
You theocrats scare me.
Again, it's not like the example person in the passage wasn't given every opportunity to repent.
Sent from my Pixel XL using TheologyOnline mobile app
Last edited:
Should these 'children' be executed?
Should these 'children' be executed?
Only if aggravated assault is now a capital offense.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ens-attacking-mentally-disabled-man/15321811/
How about this teen?
Maybe teens like this in violent gangs?
Pretend you don't get the point, what the bible is describing, isnt rude young children, but those who wreak havoc and unchecked would destroy communities.
“If there is anyone who curses his father or his mother, he shall surely be put to death" Leviticus 20:9
In those times, if a person grew to be rebellious and given to sins, they remained that way. It was not a 'second chance' world, you either rose to be what you needed to be or you didn't.
However, it required the permission of both the mother and father so that it wouldn't be abused by an authority. The way it was seen was that if a person is simple- if a person was going to grow into sin and make their family miserable, there was no reason to have them around.
Banishment was the particular choice, and stoning to death if they remained or persisted.
Try reading some commentaries, folks :chuckle:
In those times, if a person grew to be rebellious and given to sins, they remained that way. It was not a 'second chance' world, you either rose to be what you needed to be or you didn't.
However, it required the permission of both the mother and father so that it wouldn't be abused by an authority. The way it was seen was that if a person is simple- if a person was going to grow into sin and make their family miserable, there was no reason to have them around.
Banishment was the particular choice, and stoning to death if they remained or persisted.
Try reading some commentaries, folks :chuckle:
I prefer trained theologians over web bloggers :idunno:
Havoc comes in many forms. Are they all capital offenses?
Keep pretending you don't get the point. We both know though, that you do.
I get the point that you and JudgeRightly are in favor of returning to Jewish theocratic laws and punishment.
I believe that Commandment #5 has more to do with age of consent/accountability laws here in western civilization than with stoning to death those who go astray.
I defined what the bible is saying in the verse quoted. Keep pretending you dont get it to skirt the discussion as usual.