Gerald said:Obedience doesn't require respect, either.
Respect requires love, moron.
Gerald said:Obedience doesn't require respect, either.
Wow. :BRAVO: You showed him.Lighthouse said:
Respect requires love, moron.
Christianity isn't about the obedience of slaves but the love of a son or brother. If you do not love you are not a Christian, especially if you do not love God. Thus it is quite impossible to force people to be a Christian (a real one anyway).Gerald said:It appears we're shooting at different targets: you're concerned about love, while I'm concerned about obedience, which doesn't require love.
There are thousands of ways but just off the top of my head. You could go to local hardware store and buy a table saw and know that it was of good quality because the store owner would know that he would be held responsible if anyone where to get injured because of any faulty workmanship in the making of the saw. They would be made to pay limb for limb, life for life in restitution for any harm that their neglagence caused. All this would be accomplised without endless reems of legal mumbo jumbo as well. If a store own knowingly sells you a faulty item and you get killed, the store owner is executed. Short sweet and simple enough for a third grader to understand. And no child could ever grow up without knowing that such rules are in place and seeing their effect.Details, please? How do "Biblical principles" get woven into, say, buying groceries at the store?
Ok, how about this. The store owner unknowingly sells a faulty item and it kills someone? Who do we off in that instance? It seems to me that the law would become a few more than 3 pages with exceptions like this one.Clete said:Christianity isn't about the obedience of slaves but the love of a son or brother. If you do not love you are not a Christian, especially if you do not love God. Thus it is quite impossible to force people to be a Christian (a real one anyway).
There are thousands of ways but just off the top of my head. You could go to local hardware store and buy a table saw and know that it was of good quality because the store owner would know that he would be held responsible if anyone where to get injured because of any faulty workmanship in the making of the saw. They would be made to pay limb for limb, life for life in restitution for any harm that their neglagence caused. All this would be accomplised with endless reems of legal mumbo jumbo as well. If a store own knowingly sells you a faulty item and you get killed, the store owner is executed. Short sweet and simple enough for a third grader to understand. And no child could ever grow up without knowing that such rules are in place and seeing their effect.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Liar.granite1010 said:Sounding more and more totalitarian as this thread goes on.
Forget granite for a minute. We are still talking about something.Clete said:Liar.
Lighthouse said:
Respect requires love, moron.
Clete said:Liar.
Whomever was at fault for the malfunctioning item. If it was an accident (i.e. it was not due to anyone's negligence) then there would be no punishment.Caledvwlch said:Ok, how about this. The store owner unknowingly sells a faulty item and it kills someone? Who do we off in that instance? It seems to me that the law would become a few more than 3 pages with exceptions like this one.
Yay! Deuteronomy! :banana:granite1010 said:It wouldn't happen to include a provision allowing a woman's hand to be cut off, would it?
granite1010 said:It wouldn't happen to include a provision allowing a woman's hand to be cut off, would it?
granite1010 said:It wouldn't happen to include a provision allowing a woman's hand to be cut off, would it?
Ok that's no fun. It was a fair enough question.Clete said:Very good! You just ended this discussion.
:wave2:
I think the upshot is that you're held responsible for whatever happens whether you know about it or not.Caledvwlch said:Ok, how about this. The store owner unknowingly sells a faulty item and it kills someone? Who do we off in that instance? It seems to me that the law would become a few more than 3 pages with exceptions like this one.
Clete said:Very good! You just ended this discussion.
:wave2:
C'mon, granite. You know they get testy when you cite anything that makes them look like the Taliban.granite1010 said:It wouldn't happen to include a provision allowing a woman's hand to be cut off, would it?
Translation: "I'm taking my ball and going home" :taoist: .Clete said:Very good! You just ended this discussion.
:wave2:
Zakath said:C'mon, granite. You know they get testy when you cite anything that makes them look like the Taliban.