A question to Jesus Christ (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 03:50:26 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  A question to Jesus Christ (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: A question to Jesus Christ  (Read 4923 times)
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


« on: February 18, 2005, 01:49:46 PM »

Could you guess what would be Jesus’s  response?
Why guess?

John 8:7 But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."

Although the example was one of a death sentence, the lesson for accusers is about JUDGING OTHERS, and the lesson for the sinner is about FORGIVING YOURSELF and REPENTENCE.

You missed the point by focusing on the example rather than on the lesson; for the lesson does NOT apply only to adultery and the death penalty, but to all sins.
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


« Reply #1 on: February 18, 2005, 03:15:03 PM »

Could you guess what would be Jesus’s  response?
Why guess?

John 8:7 But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her."

On the flip side…If we look only at the example and not the lesson, then we should at least understand the meaning of stoning a person to death under the Old Testament law; for it was not only a physical condemnation, but also a spiritual one.

The crowd who wanted to stone the woman was not just trying to condemn her physical life; they were also trying to condemn her soul.  That’s why, even to this day, people use the phrase “casting stones” in the context of judging others.

But, if we apply the example only to physical condemnation, then the lesson is ONLY for those having authority to execute people, so that the lesson has no meaning for vast majority…that’s not the way scripture works since its purpose is to preach to the masses and not the extreme minority.

But, if we allow ourselves to apply it to only those in authority to carry out executions, then why do the conversions of those having such authority in the New Testament lack any mention of them giving up such authority?:

1) Cornelius, the first gentile convert, was a man of war, a centurion, with 100 other men of war under his command. Yet no mention of him relinquishing his command is noted in scripture.  Furthermore, he was commended as being a God fearing man evening before his conversion to Christianity.
2) The Proconsul of Paphos was converted and didn’t leave his profession.
3) The Philippian jailer, who carried a sword and the authority to execute, did not leave his post upon his conversion.  To the contrary, he returned to his job!

In fact, of the thirteen conversion scenes noted in the book of Acts, four involve men charged with the authority to carry out executions.  Of those four, three of them are mentioned above, but none of the three changed professions.  (The fourth was Paul, formerly known as Saul, who was carrying out a religious persecution of Christians.)  Yet, the sexually immoral left their lives of sin, as did the idolaters, thieves, drunkards, slanderers, swindlers, etc.  So why not the executioners?

On top of all of that, the New Testament shows respect for executioners and calls them “agents of God’s wrath.”
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


« Reply #2 on: February 18, 2005, 06:25:44 PM »

maybe there are people on death row who havent commited a 'real crime'?

And maybe there are people serving life sentences who haven't committed a 'real crime', and maybe there are people serving 40 years sentences who haven't committed a 'real crime', and maybe there are people serving 30 days who haven't committed a 'real crime'.....so what is your point?
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


« Reply #3 on: February 18, 2005, 06:27:05 PM »

But Jerry Falwell who appointed himself to be the spokesman of Jesus does enthusiastically support the death penalty. So I repeat my questions:

Is J.Falwwel a Christian ?
Does J.Falwell really understand Christianity?

When did Falwell appoint himself to be "the spokesman of Jesus Christ"?
Logged
Swing low, sweet chariot. Comin' for to carry me home.
jmfcst
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 18,212
United States


« Reply #4 on: February 18, 2005, 06:48:09 PM »

at the very least, if dna proves a person didnt commit a crime you can let them out of jail.  if you kill them, what do you say, 'oops'?

What about the vast majority of cases where DNA is not an issue?  

Perfect knowledge has NEVER been an issue with carrying out sentences, that's why we only ask a jury to measure a person's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, because the jury can NEVER be 100% sure since they were not there when the crime happened, otherwise they would be a witness.

The argument of "the system is not perfect" is hypocritical...that is, unless you want ban ALL punishments for EVERY crime.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.028 seconds with 12 queries.