An excellent example of what I mean when I say that you think that God is unjust.
The bible NEVER condoned race-based slavery. Slavery in terms of biblical criminal justice had to do with paying debts with your labor when you couldn't afford to do so by other means. It is much closer to what we would call indentured servitude but the bible calls it slavery and so that term is fine with me so long as it's clear what is being discussed.
I wasn't referring to biblical slavery or 'indentured servitude' as you so call the biblical variety although I should have clarified that. I was giving an example of a law that was rightfully abolished.
It isn't anywhere near being more speculation than it is anything else. That's why I said that for most laws it's completely easy to tell the difference. Stealing is a moral issue, murder is a moral issue, sexual immorality is a moral issue, assault, kidnapping, trespassing, etc, etc, are all moral issues whereas things like circumcision, sabbath observance and how many doves to offer as a sacrifice for your sin are religious issues.
You can probably count on one hand the number of laws that the bible had in place for Israel that are somewhat difficult.
Then which ones would those be and why?
You deny believing that these are matter of opinion and then explain how they are not only a matter of opinion but of majority opinion! Matters of morality are NOT matters of opinion and they sure as Hell are not matters for a majority vote!
Our laws reflect what is criminal, not immoral in itself. Most Christians would probably agree that adultery and homosexuality are immoral but it isn't the job of the state to punish citizens for 'sexual indiscretions', at least not outside of the church at any rate. I presume you're in favour of a theocratic state?
Contrary to your notion that a society's laws are a reflection of the society, it is the opposite, the society is a reflection of its laws. This is a consequence of Adam having eaten the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It is, in fact, a primary theme of scripture and a major lesson of history taught in the pages of the bible.
Then society has improved as its progressed then. No more segregation, women being allowed the vote, the abolition of slavery etc. Compare the West with a totalitarian state like North Korea and you're damn lucky to live in a land that affords such freedom in relation.
Why do you debate issues that you literally know nothing at all about?
God's idea for punishing a young couple who are caught fornicating is that they are required to get married. No whipping, no executions, no enslavement, no shunning, no nothing that is in anyway harsh except that the young man has to marry the girl he knocked up. Boy, God is just so harsh and terrible, isn't He!
For some couples it would be...
You are making the error of thinking that in a society where such laws were in place that people would act like they do here where such laws are not in place.
It wouldn't take but about two public executions of adulterers and suddenly people would start to think that the risk-reward ratio is far enough weighted to the risk side that the secret fling they're having is no longer worth it.
If America or the West in general was totalitarian already then perhaps, but it isn't and there wouldn't be a cat in hell's chance of it becoming so.
If you stop housing and feeding murderers in places where they're allowed to still be bullies and beat people up from time to time and instead, start allowing their victim's families to publically and painfully execute them in whatever non-torturous manner they see fit, suddenly people will decide that maybe the $50 dollars in that guy's wallet isn't worth killing him over.
Not to mention the fact that when people stop cheating on their spouses, one of, if not THE most prominent motives for murder goes away.
The point being is the execution of capital crimes stops the people who remain alive from every committing the crime in the first place. It's a deterrent that actually works.
Arguable that the DP is actually that effective as a deterrent in itself. Some countries seem to have lower crime rates without it. I realize that you think the current set up isn't as effective as you'd prefer it to be but there's conflicting stats on the issue.
What passes for a death penalty in the country bears no resemblance to that taught in scripture. You are once again judging a just society from within the context of an unjust one. It is not a valid form of argument. You are basically arguing that apples can't be sweat because onions aren't.
The appeal process that exists in this country is entirely unjust. A person convicted of a capital crime should typically be dead before the sun sets on the day of their conviction.
Then how should guilt be ascertained and sentencing carried out? Literally on the word of two or three witnesses? If you did away with the appeals process and sentenced people to death without 100% proof of their crime then what you have is far from just. The one we have now isn't perfect but it's far preferable to that.
By what standard to you consider American jurist prudence to be the best in the world?
The success rate in accurate convictions is higher than most, although it ain't perfect.
Under any system, you will have innocent people convicted and guilty people go free. Unlike what the American conventional wisdom is, neither of those is any better or preferable than the other. Both are unjust.
It's true you would have both as with the human element mistakes are inevitable. You don't compound that by doing away with an appeals process that would guarantee innocent people being sent to their deaths.
The key to minimizing this injustice is not endless appeals, it is a harsh deterrent to crime. The less crime that is committed the fewer false verdicts can happen. The current system sees tens of thousands of innocent people murdered precisely because what nearly indiscernible punishment that does exist for crimes is seemingly delayed forever and as a result has next to no deterrent effect whatsoever.
Again, it's debatable that the DP itself is as much of a deterrent as you think it is.
There is no moral equivalence between homosexuality and fornication. The fact that you think that the bible teaches otherwise is further proof that you believe God is unjust and that is the core of your disagreement with biblical law.
Neither are crimes.
Further, whether or not it would spark a revolution is entirely irrelevant to the discussion. Once again, morality is NOT a matter of opinion. Evil revolutions have happened many times throughout history. That doesn't mean that the people who were against the revolutionaries should have changed their position to prevent the revolution. Not doing the right thing for fear of the consequences is not a proper argument for any Christian or even any good citizen to make.
Well, it's all kinda moot as it just wouldn't happen in the West. No politician or party would go near what you suggest as they'd be ousted from power for contravening human rights before you could say 1984. Most Christians don't agree with the implementation of a theocratic state and with good reason.
You can say what you like. Opinions are cheap. I have thousands of years worth of history and God's own words to back up what I say. What have you got?
The same amount of history and how society has in the main progressed for the better through time. Even with the passages you use they don't say that governing authorities are to go around executing gays.
No, you would not have to invade anyone's privacy! GOD IS NOT UNJUST! You're starting to piss me off with this crap. There are all kinds of laws on our books right now that people commit IN PRIVATE! They get caught all the time and there's no need to invade anyone's privacy. There are about a million different ways that investigators can get probable cause without having to install cameras in every bedroom or any other such idiotic dystopian stupidity similar to it.
Of course you would. You wouldn't
need cameras in everyone's bedroom to usurp people's privacy. Heck, if investigators can use "probable cause" to snoop in someone's home, even if just based on some random tip off then you can kiss goodbye to anything
like the rights we have now. Just how do you think totalitarian states go about things Clete? You think they produce a warrant every time they wanna talk to a suspect?! You would turn America and any other 'free' country into a dystopian nightmare of the worst sort.
And yes, it will happen eventually. Not in this country but God Himself plans to come and rule the nations with an iron fist and will make the law honorable. (Isaiah 42:21 & Revelation 2:27)
Well, at least there won't be any miscarriages of justice then.
And you keep saying it can't work. It already has worked in many countries for several centuries, not the least of which was Israel! The laws you read in the Old Testament where Israel's actual laws that governed their whole society for centuries.
It won't work in an enlightened modern age, not in the West anyway. Places like Uganda show just what a travesty of human rights happens with their laws.
So if unjust laws worked just fine, by your own admission, how exactly are you arguing that just laws can't work? Or are you suggesting that the laws that enacted and supported race-based slavery were ineffective?
Just to clarify here, what unjust laws I admitted 'worked just fine'?
Communal society? Who in the world is advocating a communal society? Communes are Communist! Communes are dystopian by definition but Israel wasn't Communist or even Communistic. If anything they were Capitalists! Israel's laws included private property rights, free trade and required just compensation for services or goods rendered. Jesus taught directly that a man is allowed to do whatever he likes with his own money (Mattew 20:15).
I wasn't suggesting you were advocating a communal society. Merely pointing out that in times past people happened to live more in communes...
You live in a country with the highest percentage of its citizens in prison than any country in the history of history! The United States represents about 4.4 percent of the world's population, it houses around 22 percent of the world's prisoners.
You say we have the best system!
BY WHAT STANDARD?
Er, I live in the UK Clete. I answered you on this earlier and it doesn't say much about the death penalty being a deterrent in itself does it. It's not like it
isn't used in America whatever you may think about the processes.
Jesus is God Himself, Arthur! His statement, "Let him who has no sin, cast the first stone." was not Jesus making a suggestion. It was the King of Kings and Judge of all that lives giving a command. No stones were thrown for the same reason the wind stopped blowing in Matthew 8.
Then I'm sure God could have made the crowd disappear without uttering a single word if He'd willed but that isn't what's recorded is it? You didn't answer my question either. What do you suppose Jesus was writing on the ground and why? You say it was a command, I don't think so, I don't think He
needed to command people to leave. Their consciences did that. Now it's speculation sure but how about if Jesus was writing down a list of things that everyone in that crowd would have been guilty of, maybe adultery itself, coveting, lust etc. Everyone in that crowd were convicted of something ok, that none of them were sinless. If this was all about avoiding a legal trap then why bring sin into it? Do you think that if it was all above board and it would have been lawful to stone the woman then it would have gone ahead with Jesus' approval?
This was frankly a stupid thing to say. I suggest that your reasonable and then you turn your mind off. By this reasoning, this country would've seemed to be a dystopian place to live 200 years ago. The advancement of technology has nothing to do with what is right and wrong. Armed robbery is wrong whether it's done with a Smith & Wesson M&P 40 or a stone axe.
A couple of hundred years ago the USA
would have been a dystopia for some, as would several other places.
Then why bother calling yourself a Christian?
Romans 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.
32 ...knowing the righteous judgment of God, that those who practice such things are deserving of death, not only do the same but also approve of those who practice them.
Incidentally, Romans chapter 1 is in the New Testament and was written by the Apostle Paul, the Apostle of the Gospel of Grace. Imagine that!
Resting in Him,
Clete
I don't, or any other particular tag. Apart from the vocal 'far right' there's few Christians who support the same as you, thankfully.
