Pediatrician refuses to care for lesbians' baby

[aCultureWarrior]

Is it that you don't really understand him or that you just don't have an answer for him, because that link was just an empty gust of wind the first time around.

That's not a call to anarchy unless you own a bad dictionary. Christ was hard on hypocrites, on people who knew better and misled. To a woman who could have been stoned to death he said what? Neither do I condemn/go and sin no more.

He didn't say, "Take her somewhere else, I can't deal with it."

And he could have hurled the first stone, by the way. In case you didn't notice that part.

You're implying that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh was some kind of anarchist who didn't believe that adultery should be punished (I'll wait while you find Him saying that).

Jesus knew that it takes two to commit an act of adultery, and since no one came forward to admit that he was the other party, there was no case for criminal prosecution.

You being a lawyer (cough cough) should know the basics of our Judeo-Christianized criminal justice system.

 

[bybee]

You're implying that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh was some kind of anarchist who didn't believe that adultery should be punished (I'll wait while you find Him saying that).

Jesus knew that it takes two to commit an act of adultery, and since no one came forward to admit that he was the other party, there was no case for criminal prosecution.

You being a lawyer (cough cough) should know the basics of our Judeo-Christianized criminal justice system.

If only you had been taught some manners....

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Is there supposed to be a point to this post? Your link doesn't show me making a claim that Christ approved of sinful behavior.

Refer to my post addressed to Town Heretic.

If Jesus Christ only believed in evangelism as a way to deal with sinners, then He would have abolished the criminal justice system which He ordained.

 

[Morpheus]

One more thing before I move on...

Is there anywhere in Holy Scripture showing that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh went into criminal court and pleaded with the Magistrates/Judges to not punish those accused and convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, theft, or your beloved homosexuality?

Since you know the Bible inside and out, if it's there you'd obviously know about it.

He had no occasion to do so. He dealt with incidents as they arose. So what's your point? You somehow think that because I have love and compassion for homosexuals, murderers, rapists, and yes, even the dread child molesters, that For one second I approve their behavior? I understand them. Having realized my own brokenness and sinu, and realizing just how much I have been forgiven, I can empathize with others. Until you fully realize just how sick and damaged you are your pride will prevent you ever understanding the love of Christ. That is what he means when He says to humble yourself. Pride caused Satan to be cast from God's presence. Pride will keep men out no matter how holy or saved they believe they are.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
One more thing before I move on...

Is there anywhere in Holy Scripture showing that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh went into criminal court and pleaded with the Magistrates/Judges to not punish those accused and convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, theft, or your beloved homosexuality?

Since you know the Bible inside and out, if it's there you'd obviously know about it.

He had no occasion to do so. He dealt with incidents as they arose.

So "No, Jesus Christ didn't go into criminal court and plead with the Magistrates/Judges to not punish those accused and convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, theft, or your beloved homosexuality."

Thank you for acknowledging that.

So what's your point?

Punishing those that break righteous laws is just as important as evangelizing to those people, because without righteous punishment, you have nothing but anarchy.

And as we're seen through your own words: Jesus Christ wasn't an anarchist.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

ACW is promoting the murder of gay people? What else is new?

 

[Morpheus]

Refer to my post addressed to Town Heretic.

If Jesus Christ only believed in evangelism as a way to deal with sinners, then He would have abolished the criminal justice system which He ordained.

He did.

Romans 10:1-4
1 Brethren, my heart’s desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. 2 For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3 For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. 4 For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes.



Galatians 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.



Hebrews 7:11-22
11 Now if perfection was through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the people received the Law), what further need was there for another priest to arise according to the order of Melchizedek, and not be designated according to the order of Aaron? 12 For when the priesthood is changed, of necessity there takes place a change of law also. 13 For the one concerning whom these things are spoken belongs to another tribe, from which no one has officiated at the altar. 14 For it is evident that our Lord [f]was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests. 15 And this is clearer still, if another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, 16 who has become such not on the basis of a law of [g]physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life. 17 For it is attested of Him,

“You are a priest forever
According to the order of Melchizedek.”
18 For, on the one hand, there is a setting aside of a former commandment because of its weakness and uselessness 19 (for the Law made nothing perfect), and on the other hand there is a bringing in of a better hope, through which we draw near to God. 20 And inasmuch as it was not without an oath 21 (for they indeed became priests without an oath, but He with an oath through the One who said to Him,

“The Lord has sworn
And will not change His mind,
‘You are a priest forever’”);
22 so much the more also Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant.



Galatians 3:23-26
23 But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. 24 Therefore the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor. 26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.

The old Mosaic law is still useful to give us some insights, but the law no longer rules over us. It was a child's lesson necessary to prepare us for greater things.

Mosaic law was given to the nation of Israel. Christ's kingdom is heavenly, not of this world.

 

[Town Heretic]

You're implying that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh was some kind of anarchist

You keep saying that, but you never get around to saying why.

who didn't believe that adultery should be punished (I'll wait while you find Him saying that).

I think Christ was demonstrating/foreshadowing his purpose, which wasn't to judge, but to allow us through his sacrifice to escape judgment of the only sort that ultimately matters.

Jesus knew that it takes two to commit an act of adultery,

But the law without mercy would have taken her anyway. Or, you don't propose to release one murderer when you can't catch his helpmate, do you? That would be...anarchy.

and since no one came forward to admit that he was the other party, there was no case for criminal prosecution.

That's not true. The crowd bore witness to her sin. She didn't deny it. Supra.

 

[Morpheus]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
One more thing before I move on...

Is there anywhere in Holy Scripture showing that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh went into criminal court and pleaded with the Magistrates/Judges to not punish those accused and convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, theft, or your beloved homosexuality?

Since you know the Bible inside and out, if it's there you'd obviously know about it.



So "No, Jesus Christ didn't go into criminal court and plead with the Magistrates/Judges to not punish those accused and convicted of crimes such as murder, rape, theft, or your beloved homosexuality."

Thank you for acknowledging that.



Punishing those that break righteous laws is just as important as evangelizing to those people, because without righteous punishment, you have nothing but anarchy.

And as we're seen through your own words: Jesus Christ wasn't an anarchist.

Yet He, even when He was here, prevented legal consequences on several occasions. After He defeated death the law became unnecessary. The law never saved anyone from the beginning. Its purpose was to teach us that we are incapable of keeping it so we would eventually realize that we needed a savior.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Yet He, even when He was here, prevented legal consequences on several occasions. After He defeated death the law became unnecessary. The law never saved anyone from the beginning. Its purpose was to teach us that we are incapable of keeping it so we would eventually realize that we needed a savior.

We're talking about two different things here: eternal salvation which is achieved through repentance of sin and God's grace vs. righteous laws and punishment for criminal behavior while here on earth.

As always Morphie, it was nice chattin wit cha.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote:
Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior
You're implying that Jesus Christ/the Son of God/God in the flesh was some kind of anarchist

You keep saying that, but you never get around to saying why.

I get the feeling that like all other liberals who misinterpret Holy Scripture that you want others to believe that had the woman actually been caught in the act of adultery that Jesus would have let her go.

If you're saying that He would have, then wouldn't that have made God an anarchist? (i.e. someone who didn't believe in His own rule of law).


Quote:
who didn't believe that adultery should be punished (I'll wait while you find Him saying that).

I think Christ was demonstrating/foreshadowing his purpose, which wasn't to judge, but to allow us through his sacrifice to escape judgment of the only sort that ultimately matters.

Back to the anarchy issue.


Quote:
Jesus knew that it takes two to commit an act of adultery,

But the law without mercy would have taken her anyway. Or, you don't propose to release one murderer when you can't catch his helpmate, do you? That would be...anarchy.

My my, you are rusty when it comes to law. Adultery takes two culprits, to murder it takes only one culprit and one victim.


Quote:
and since no one came forward to admit that he was the other party, there was no case for criminal prosecution.

That's not true. The crowd bore witness to her sin. She didn't deny it. Supra.

You mean the mob that accused her of adultery yet no one came forward and admitted they too committed adultery with her?

Dust off those legal books TH, you're embarrassing yourself.

 

[Morpheus]

We're talking about two different things here: eternal salvation which is achieved through repentance of sin and God's grace vs. righteous laws and punishment for criminal behavior while here on earth.

As always Morphie, it was nice chattin wit cha.

So you skipped the first sentence? Mosaic law has no worldly power any longer, and it never did for Gentiles. It was law for the worldly nation of Israel, and Christ ended the power of it for even Jews who came to Him. As I said earlier, He prevented the imputing of Mosaic law on several occasions even prior to His crucifixion. He and His disciples were often accused of breaking the law themselves.

So again, why do you keep hanging onto dead law and focusing on the sins of unbelievers, while avoiding recognizing your brokeness due to your own sins. Until you recognize and admit that you're no better than they are your pride makes you useless to Jesus. You do more harm than good.

Off to cook paella now.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

So you skipped the first sentence? Mosaic law has no worldly power any longer, and it never did for Gentiles. It was law for the worldly nation of Israel, and Christ ended the power of it for even Jews who came to Him. As I said earlier, He prevented the imputing of Mosaic law on several occasions even prior to His crucifixion. He and His disciples were often accused of breaking the law themselves.

So God doesn't believe in Romans 13:4 and the numerous other verses in Scripture defining the role of government?

Civil laws are for unbelievers and believers alike. If you don't believe me, run a stoplight and tell the officer who stopped you that
laws don't apply to you.

(Liberals, you can't reason with them).

Refer to my WHMBR! Part 3 thread that discusses moral, civil and ceremonial laws.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4136991&postcount=3743

 

[Town Heretic]

I get the feeling that like all other liberals who

See, how can I credit your exegesis when you can't even get my politics right?

misinterpret Holy Scripture that you want others to believe that had the woman actually been caught in the act of adultery that Jesus would have let her go.

She was caught. He did let her go. Yours is the read in.

And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst... John 8:3​

Taken in, not rumored to have been.

If you're saying that He would have, then wouldn't that have made God an anarchist? (i.e. someone who didn't believe in His own rule of law).

No, I told you what the point of that was.

My my, you are rusty when it comes to law.

Well, no.

Adultery takes two culprits, to murder it takes only one culprit and one victim.

And more than one person can be guilty of the same murder (nice attempt at a dodge though). And if Brutus alone can be caught with Caesars' blood upon him, we don't let him go because we can't find the other senators, do we? :nono:

and since no one came forward to admit that he was the other party, there was no case for criminal prosecution.

That's nonsense and it doesn't alter her guilt, which she didn't deny. Moreover, Christ in his last to her acknowledged it. "Go and sin no more" isn't something you say to the innocent.

Dust off those legal books TH, you're embarrassing yourself.

Nice flag. You sew it yourself?

 

[Eeset]

Doctor Roi continues to be in the news.

 

[Morpheus]

So God doesn't believe in Romans 13:4 and the numerous other verses in Scripture defining the role of government?

Civil laws are for unbelievers and believers alike. If you don't believe me, run a stoplight and tell the officer who stopped you that
laws don't apply to you.

(Liberals, you can't reason with them).

Refer to my WHMBR! Part 3 thread that discusses moral, civil and ceremonial laws.
http://www.theologyonline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4136991&postcount=3743

Play a lot of dodge ball as a kid? Nobody claimed that civil law is illegitimate. You keep referring to Mosaic law and that was what was being discussed. Unless you are under sharia law you can't claim that homosexuality is illegal today. Maybe you would be more comfortable with sharia law. If you want to go back to Mosaic law I already showed you the consequences for wanting that in:

Galatians 5:4
You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

 

[GFR7]

Doctor Roi continues to be in the news.

Oh, thanks. I will look her up now. :up:..........
:jawdrop: Yikes, this has been picked up everywhere.......

 

[Eeset]

Every day I see more articles about Dr. Roi on the web. I wonder how long she will be in the news.

 

[Morpheus]

Every day I see more articles about Dr. Roi on the web. I wonder how long she will be in the news.

'Til the next irritating tidbit pops up, then whoosh, she's history.

 

[GFR7]

Every day I see more articles about Dr. Roi on the web. I wonder how long she will be in the news.

Me, too. I also wonder what, if any, effect this will have on her practice?