You make no sense sometimes. You say the law applies but not to the gentiles. You say that great commission is only for the original Apostles.
I am very curious, what does a Christian life mean to you?
What Kind Of Person Could "Execute" A Child?
- Thread starter Arthur Brain
- Start date
You make no sense sometimes. You say the law applies but not to the gentiles. You say that great commission is only for the original Apostles.
I am very curious, what does a Christian life mean to you?
The fact that we say the same should tell you something...
Thompson and Venables (or whatever their names are) are a good example that says a child CAN be and ARE guilty of capital crimes.
Well, if you profane God by killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live, it seems like if one does the opposite, kill people who should die, and keep people alive who should live, then God will be glorified.
I'm reminded of a news headline when a criminal was executed in some other country. It read "God Exists!"
:think:
Because you're too squeamish. You try to make an emotional argument against us, and then expect us to fall in line with your position, and when we don't, you just rinse and repeat.
Killing someone who murdered someone is a just thing to do, regardless of their willingness to follow through.
Last edited:
Of course it applies to the Gentiles.
The ones it does NOT apply to, yet they should still establish/uphold it, are those in the Body of Christ.
If you can show that Jesus was speaking to someone other than them during His ascension, please, do.
Loving God and loving one's neighbor.
Right Divider
Body part
I do make sense.... you just don't understand sense.
Where did I say that?
Firstly, the "great commission" as most claim it is a construction of Churchianity and was ONLY given to the twelve.
Paul received an entirely different commission that was pretty great too. There are many commissions in the Bible and the so-called "great commission" has MANY other characteristics that are all but ignored by you and most of Churchianity.
It means following the CURRENT commission and not the one given to the TWELVE apostles for the TWELVE tribes of Israel.
genuineoriginal
New member
No. The death of Jesus on the cross and His resurrection did not fulfill the law.
The Greek word translated as "fulfill" means "fill to the top" according to the dictionary.
Jesus's words in Matthew 5,6,7 was Jesus "filling to the top" the commandments of the law.
Here is one example:
Matthew 5:27-28 27 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: 28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart. |
There are still prophecies in the Law and prophets that have not come to pass, so the death of Jesus and His resurrection did not accomplish everything from the Law and prophets.
Right Divider
Body part
No, I can't. I'm not sorry.
You are stupid beyond belief.
Sent from my SM-A520F using Tapatalk
If God forgives someone, He can still punish them for sinning? That doesn't make any sense.
If God forgives someone, they they are forgiven, in God's eyes, their slate is wiped clean! They cannot be held accountable for anything they did!
Cab, if a family member was murdered by a murderer, can you forgive him for killing your family member?
See the other post of mine above.
If God forgives you, you will be welcomed into heaven. But you may have to do 7 to 10 here on Earth first.
I hope I never have to answer that question but I would like to think that I would. I am also pretty sure that I would use deadly force to protect my family.
So is Israel still under the Law? What about Gentiles? What Law did Paul bring to the Gentiles? Any Law? No Law?
I seem to recall Paul not agreeing with you in regards to laws and Gentiles.
What would you forgive him of? Murder or taking someone you love from you?
Which has no bearing on our current discussion.
Please provide the passage.
The entire world is under the law.
Yes, I would agree. But what about the 6 year old child who was playing with a gun who accidentally kills a family member. Set aside all the stuff about whether a loaded gun should have been accessible or about teaching gun safety to a child and just deal with the question as asked. Is a six year old who accidentally shoots and kills a family member guilty of a capitol crime?
Well, if you profane God by killing people who should not die, and keeping people alive who should not live, it seems like if one does the opposite, kill people who should die, and keep people alive who should live, then God will be glorified.
I'm reminded of a news headline when a criminal was executed in some other country. It read "God Exists!"
:think:
Because you're too squeamish. You try to make an emotional argument against us, and then expect us to fall in line with your position, and when we don't, you just rinse and repeat.
Killing someone who murdered someone is a just thing to do, regardless of their willingness to follow through.[/QUOTE]
As I have said before, and which I am not sure how you still have not understood or comprehended this, accidentally killing someone IS NOT MURDER, therefore, the killer SHOULD NOT BE EXECUTED!
This passage SPECIFICALLY deals with this sort of scenario.
“When the Lord your God has cut off the nations whose land the Lord your God is giving you, and you dispossess them and dwell in their cities and in their houses,you shall separate three cities for yourself in the midst of your land which the Lord your God is giving you to possess.You shall prepare roads for yourself, and divide into three parts the territory of your land which the Lord your God is giving you to inherit, that any manslayer may flee there. - Deuteronomy 19:1-3 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Deuteronomy19:1-3&version=NKJV
The evidence (remember, two or three witnesses) would show that he is not guilty, but that it was an accident.
Answered above and prior to this post, here in this thread and in other threads.
Hmmm. The case would be much more challenging if there are not witnesses then. But thank you for your answer.
That claim was made early in this thread, that a child accidentally killing somebody was guilty of a capital crime.
Witnesses are not necessarily eyewitnesses.