what do you mean?
Biblically, God wants us to give freely, and be cheerful about it. That is far cry from being forced to give by the government.
I find it interesting that you quote Mormon doctrine that have no biblical basis.
Okay, your points:
1) Does not apply because that is not referring to the death penalty. It is speaking of you think you're better than that guy. Has nothing to do with punishment of sins. If you're talking about the verse where he says let he who is without sin cast the first stone, then it also does not apply because those people brought that woman to him saying look what she has done, look how horrible she is. They were also tempting him, trying to find fault in him.
2) Back it up with a verse. Your making your opinion fact.
3) Yes, we are to forgive. Forgiveness != lack of punishment.
4) Considering that God many times commanded the death of someone for a transgression, your logic doesn't flow.
And quit it with the light buld, it doesn't make your post witty or any brighter.
Originally posted by: evident
as a progressive catholic, i find it unfortunate to see that most americans lump ALL christians as ultra right wing you're-all-going-to-hell assholes. it seems that in most religions only the zealots get their voice heard and all the moderates have to suffer with being associated with them
Christians believe God calls them to live a particular way.
Theocrats believe God calls the entire nation to live a particular way, preferably but not necessarily voluntarily.
This is appealing to fundamental christianists. It's appealing to the distorted brand of Christianity of the televangelists and especially of those dutiful bleating sheep in the Southern Baptist and Assemblies of God sects/cults.
There has always been a progressive side of Christianity that helped fuel the Civil Rights movement and the like, that has been all but buried by the right wing evangelical theocrat. It's a shame they get all the press and it's almost a given they will vote Republican.
This 'forced to give' argument always makes me laugh. Hate to tell ya but the (R)'s tax and spend just like the (D)'s do. You might agree/disagree with specifics on what they do with the money but we all can't pick and choose where our tax money goes. If I could I'd be spending less of mine in Iraq.
ZeroIQ: To make my life easier, I'm going to simply quote "thou shall not kill" from the 10 commandments. I'm surprised you even needed me to do that! Do you really think that Christians condone killing people?
Are you certain that's accurate and has passed the canon of scripture?
You should also realize that Moses was a prophet with a divine connection to God.
Try again. God killed and he does not hold a double standard. Because of this it would mean that he sinned, which is impossible, therefore your logic is flawed.
By that commandment we should not have wars, yet there are many times in the Bible that God commanded Israel to wage war on a people. You are taking it out of context, just like you accused others of doing. That commandment refers to murder.
Originally posted by: Vic
Exodus 32 leaves little room for interpretation here.
You're absolutely right Vic. I just read it.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
I'm not arguing one side or the other here, just pointing out that his citing of the 6th commandment here is fundamentally flawed. For one thing, the correct translation is "Thou shalt not commit murder." And for another is how I pointed out that Moses had some 3000 Israelites put to death for the crime of idolatry right after coming down from Sinai with the commandments (and I can't believe that I was asked if that was "canon").
I just didn't remember it, and I've read Exodus. I've even seen a movie or two involving that chapter from the Bible and there was no mention of what you were referring to.
There are people who use Bibles which contain things that many Christians do not believe have passed the canon.
Have to love Mel Brooks. Doubt his movies would see the light of day in todays world. Blazing Saddles would be slapped silly with protests hehe.
Vic
Elite Member
- Jun 12, 2001
- 50,415
- 14,305
- 136
Probably not as Richard Pryor co-wrote it. But who knows? People are silly.
Looking back through the thread, there are schools of thought that Christianity should be fundamentally opposed to the death penalty (crucifixion represents inhumanity of man, so cruel we executed God Himself, etc.) but once again, Christianity is not a monolithic faith.
For my part, insisting upon a "literal interpretation" of the Bible is akin to insisting on a literal interpretation of the movie Shrek.
Originally posted by: Robor
This 'forced to give' argument always makes me laugh. Hate to tell ya but the (R)'s tax and spend just like the (D)'s do. You might agree/disagree with specifics on what they do with the money but we all can't pick and choose where our tax money goes. If I could I'd be spending less of mine in Iraq.
I think we all agree the government will spend money on stuff that we don't agree with - no argument there.
Originally Rainsford said government is suppose to help the poor, since the government is a reflection of the people. I suggest that charitable giving to be Christian can NOT be given through the government, since government forcible takes the money.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 9K
-
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 7K
-
Facebook
Twitter