genuineoriginal
New member
You apparantly haven't read my posts.
There is a big difference in being destroyed in hellfire (Biblical lake of fire) and being tortured for eternity (Greek myth of Tartarus).
Stop being morally contemptible and repent.
toldailytopic: Does your opinion about homosexuality change if the behavior turns out
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
You apparantly haven't read my posts.
There is a big difference in being destroyed in hellfire (Biblical lake of fire) and being tortured for eternity (Greek myth of Tartarus).
Stop being morally contemptible and repent.
genuineoriginal
New member
Now you are claiming I said things I never said. I have not done anything more than state what the Biblical standards on the issue say.
When I say "rebuke" I mean it according to this definition:
rebuke
— vb
1. ( tr ) to scold or reprimand (someone)
The goal is never to execute someone, the goal is to stop the abominable behavior.— vb
1. ( tr ) to scold or reprimand (someone)
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Are you or are you not for re-implementing theocratic laws from ancient Israel into the modern West? Do you or do you not argue that convicted adulterers and those who act on homosexual desires should be executed in todays society?
EDIT: I've just noticed you only include the rebuke aspect for those boasting about such rather than 'convicted' so I'll re'edit this. Tell me, why should this rebuke or execution extend to those outside of the church?
genuineoriginal
New member
I am for recognition of God's standards and repentance for breaking those standards.
I argue that God's Word says that convicted adulterers and men that commit abominable acts with other men are guilty of an offense that is deserving of death.
The first step is to recognize that there is a problem.
The second step is to identify the problem.
The third step is to find out how to correct the problem.
We are stuck in the first step. My arguments are about getting people to recognize that there is a problem.
Recognition of God's standards was always meant to extend to those outside of His people:
Deuteronomy 4 5Behold, I have taught you statutes and judgments, even as the LORD my God commanded me, that ye should do so in the land whither ye go to possess it. 6Keep therefore and do them; for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. 7For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the LORD our God is in all things that we call upon him for? 8And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous as all this law, which I set before you this day? |
Edit:
According to Roman Law, it was lawful for Herod to marry his brother's wife. John spoke out so Herod would recognize that he broke God's law (not Roman Law). John was trying to get Herod to repent, he was not trying to get Herod executed or to change Roman Law.
Mark 6 17For Herod himself had sent forth and laid hold upon John, and bound him in prison for Herodias' sake, his brother Philip's wife: for he had married her. 18For John had said unto Herod, It is not lawful for thee to have thy brother's wife. |
So, there you have it, and now you want my head on a platter.
Last edited:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Which is a roundabout way of saying you do support the re-implementation of OT theocracy in the modern West, else what? You're not going to get anything other than a tiny zealous minority who would support such measures. People don't take kindly to their personal relationships and sex lives being anyone's business but theirs GO, at least where it's consenting at any rate. Is it any surprise as to why? Repressive and puritanical attitudes and obsessions to other peoples sex lives accomplishes what exactly?
Maybe so but imposing a zealous theocracy onto all isn't part of that. And I don't want your head on a platter either. I simply don't want what would amount to a zealous legalistic theocracy in the West. It's bad enough seeing Sharia law in action....
lain:
genuineoriginal
New member
Which is a roundabout way of saying you do support the re-implementation of OT theocracy in the modern West, else what? You're not going to get anything other than a tiny zealous minority who would support such measures. People don't take kindly to their personal relationships and sex lives being anyone's business but theirs GO, at least where it's consenting at any rate. Is it any surprise as to why? Repressive and puritanical attitudes and obsessions to other peoples sex lives accomplishes what exactly?
Maybe so but imposing a zealous theocracy onto all isn't part of that. And I don't want your head on a platter either. I simply don't want what would amount to a zealous legalistic theocracy in the West. It's bad enough seeing Sharia law in action....
See, you deliberately missed the point, and (figuratively) served up my head on a platter anyway.
lain:
Your original question was how does it effect YOU? So tell us, other than an innocent life being taken, how are YOU personally affected by abortion?
As shown time and time again, those "consenting adults" take their changeable behavior out of the bedroom, and force their beliefs on others through a well organized, financially backed agenda.
The gestapo like techniques used against individuals and organizations that dare to speak out about their lifestyle is an eye-opener.
"Angry Gays: F-Bombs, Glitterbombs, Phlegm Phones & Death Wishes":
http://townhall.com/columnists/doug...bs,_phlegm_phones_and_death_wishes/page/full/
"Homosexual bigots commit hate crimes":
http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/fischer/110520
There are 9 parts to this series, I'm only presenting one.
"Support traditional marriage and you're dead":
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=317681
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
See, you deliberately missed the point, and (figuratively) served up my head on a platter anyway.
What 'point' exactly am I missing? What exactly do you mean by 'correct' the problem if not having a theocratic administration in place that puts people to death for adultery and homosexual acts? You advocated this on the first page of the thread. Now you seem to be attempting to shy away from the reality of it. I've already explained why people aren't going to 'recognize' the 'problems' as you see it because most folk simply aren't that obsessed with what others get up to in private.
lain:
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Uh, yes ASC. I was once accused of being homophobic simply for not being actually gay.....though as with WND it turned out to be a joke.
lain:
Uh, yes ASC. I was once accused of being homophobic simply for not being actually gay.....though as with WND it turned out to be a joke.
PLEASE refute any of the information I've provided.
genuineoriginal
New member
I said nothing on the first page about setting up a theocratic government to execute people for adultery and homosexual acts.What 'point' exactly am I missing? What exactly do you mean by 'correct' the problem if not having a theocratic administration in place that puts people to death for adultery and homosexual acts? You advocated this on the first page of the thread. Now you seem to be attempting to shy away from the reality of it. I've already explained why people aren't going to 'recognize' the 'problems' as you see it because most folk simply aren't that obsessed with what others get up to in private.
You seem to think I am arguing that the only solution for the immorality in our society is to impose morality by force, but we both know that solution is a fantasy.
The solution I advocate is doing nothing more or less than what the first century Christians did about the abominations committed in their society which were permitted and encouraged by Roman Law.
1 Thessalonians 4 1Furthermore then we beseech you, brethren, and exhort you by the Lord Jesus, that as ye have received of us how ye ought to walk and to please God, so ye would abound more and more. 2For ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus. 3For this is the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornication: 4That every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honour; 5Not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God: 6That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter: because that the Lord is the avenger of all such, as we also have forewarned you and testified. 7For God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness. 8He therefore that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us his holy Spirit. |
Because they're the ones who can give consent, genius.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
You said adultery and homosexual acts were still sins worthy of death so what does that imply if not advocating executing people for these 'capital offences'? What else would carry out such if not some sort of theocratic state?
Well of course it's a fantasy. Unfortunately however, when you propose that people should still be put to death based on OT laws it also amounts to willing a moral imposing upon the populus no matter how fantastical the reality of it coming into place.
Well hey ho GO. At one point slavery was tolerable as was women being treat as doormats so things progress. Your 'solution' is nothing but puritanical zealotry because most people including Christians don't ascribe to that which you do.
This is written to those in the church. I'm not seeing as to how it's relevant to your 'solution' either.
genuineoriginal
New member
Maybe you can figure it out from the wording.
:wave2:
Only by some people's standard.
Gotta draw the line somewhere,
But some would rather let the line keep getting dimmer and dimmer until there is no line at all.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Oh please....don't you believe ALL sin is worthy of death in the end? Yet you'll single out adultery and homosexuality as still being 'worthy' in todays society as 'capital crimes' deserving of execution based on OT law. So why so shy all of a sudden?
:yawn:
Only a Christian would equate what two adults do with what a freak does to a child.
You know why? Because to you uptight prudes, it's all the same, anyway. Any sex outside of the confines of the marriage bed is perverse and aberrant. You simply don't see any difference between a man and a horse and a man and his fiancee; the particulars are irrelevant. That's some sad commentary, and it sheds a light on the dark, twisted, self-hating underbelly of the body of Christ.
P.S. By the way: if you can't say unconditionally that a child can never give consent, I'm not the one with a problem here.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
And that line should stay where it is. And unlike planks like SOD who reckon that "liberals" will tolerate the line being lowered to pre pubescence or some such nonsense it'll stay as it is.
Why don't we also execute animals which are caught in homosexual behavior ?
In the middle ages, they used to execute animals for committing "crimes." And they actually put them on trial ! I kid you not. They actually did this. It seems we still have a lot of people in this supposedly enlightened and civilized 21st century who want to persecute homosexuals. Their minds are hopelessly stuck in the barbarous past.
Unbelievable !
In the middle ages, they used to execute animals for committing "crimes." And they actually put them on trial ! I kid you not. They actually did this. It seems we still have a lot of people in this supposedly enlightened and civilized 21st century who want to persecute homosexuals. Their minds are hopelessly stuck in the barbarous past.
Unbelievable !
genuineoriginal
New member
I am talking about which sins deserve the death penalty, and why they were picked out from other sins as something so offensive that the perpetrators were to be given the harshest penalty.
The death penalty in the Bible was specified for sins that do great harm to individuals, families, and society.
The death penalty had two specific purposes:
- stop the people committing the abomination
- discourage others from committing the same abomination
Deuteronomy 17 4And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel: 5Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die. 6At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death. 7The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you. |
Deuteronomy 19 20And those which remain shall hear, and fear, and shall henceforth commit no more any such evil among you. |
The sins listed in the Bible as deserving the death penalty still do the same amount of harm today to individuals, families, and societies.
That is the truth that I am pointing out.