Should homosexuals be given the death penalty?

[Lighthouse]

Okay food cleansed. This interpretation really pushes this piece of scripture but sure... let's go for it. What about everything else none "food' related?

Did you read the rest of the post?

Anything wherein God specifically stated that it was part of the Mosaic covenant, or that it was a covenant with Israel, does not apply to us today. Acts of sexual immorality being immoral, wrong, or criminal were not only for Israel. They were, and are, wrong for all people. End of story.

 

[Lighthouse]

Well, I don't have an answer. But when the verse says they should be put to death it doesn't really say anything about letting them off if the offenders are repentant. It just says they should be put to death.

Well, now that God is willing to let us off the hook if we repent, shouldn't we be willing to let people off the hook if they repent?

 

[kmoney]

Well, now that God is willing to let us off the hook if we repent, shouldn't we be willing to let people off the hook if they repent?

oh, I agree with you and shadowmaid also, but going off the Lev. verse it just calls for death.

do you feel the same way about murder? rape? adultery?

 

[Gerald]

Well, now that God is willing to let us off the hook if we repent, shouldn't we be willing to let people off the hook if they repent?

Problem is, you have no way of knowing whether or not a given instance of repentance in sincere...

 

[Lighthouse]

oh, I agree with you and shadowmaid also, but going off the Lev. verse it just calls for death.

do you feel the same way about murder? rape? adultery?

Not in instances of rape and murder.

Honestly, I believe that if one is sincerely sorry for what they did they would seek the death penalty anyway.

 

[Lighthouse]

Problem is, you have no way of knowing whether or not a given instance of repentance in sincere...

If they begin doing it again, habitually, then they are not repentant. And, as I said above, I believe that they would seek the death penalty if they were truly repentant.

 

[Jadespring]

Christ was very reactionary to those who lived in blatant opposition of God's truth. Does that mean He didn't love them? Of course not! Does that mean He was being unloving? Of course not!

And homosexuality was not a word that existed back then, I'll agree. But the Bible has plenty to say about men having sex with men and women having sex with women. And it plainly states that it is immoral, across the board. End of discussion. because if you want to ignore what God said, and cal yourself a Christian, there is no point in even talking to you. The Bible says I shouldn't even be friends with you.

And as for the list of things, I gave the verses in an above post.

Those verses covered food. Nothing more nothing less. I'm asking about everything else. Would you like me to make a check off list? If you're are going to make such broad statements they need to be backed up. This issue is to important to be wishy washy about.
Justify....


I am not ingnoring God at all. I am Christian. Will always be Christian and if you want to turn some table around. I'm posting all of this because I love you and God wants you to know that what you are doing is wrong. What you are saying is wrong and this narrow version of the scriptural interpretation used to support intolerance is wrong. I'd warn against going to hell but I think you already live in it. Seriously. When you think of the world to you automatically think "Good" or "Bad"

You must be absolutely 100% sure of everything huh? What IF you're wrong and you send someone to death for this. Saying that you love someone so much that they (in the case of this) should be killed because they don't believe as you do is morally repugnant. God is not this petty and shallow. Stop making him out to be as such. Again I repeat. It's downright embarassing and decidely un "Christian". Well maybe 14th century Christian I can give that much. Inquisition anyone?

 

[kmoney]

Not in instances of rape and murder.

why the difference between homosexuality and rape/murder? God calls for death in all 3 cases.

Honestly, I believe that if one is sincerely sorry for what they did they would seek the death penalty anyway.

:think:

 

[Lighthouse]

why the difference between homosexuality and rape/murder? God calls for death in all 3 cases.

You asked how I felt. Not what I believed. I may feel differently than God, sometimes, but that's why He's God and I'm not.:chuckle:

:think:

Now, that's what I believe.

I also beleive that the victims have a say in these cases.

However, I believe that a first offense in one area is different than repeated offenses, or serial offenses.

 

[Lighthouse]

Those verses covered food. Nothing more nothing less. I'm asking about everything else. Would you like me to make a check off list? If you're are going to make such broad statements they need to be backed up. This issue is to important to be wishy washy about.
Justify....


I am not ingnoring God at all. I am Christian. Will always be Christian and if you want to turn some table around. I'm posting all of this because I love you and God wants you to know that what you are doing is wrong. What you are saying is wrong and this narrow version of the scriptural interpretation used to support intolerance is wrong. I'd warn against going to hell but I think you already live in it. Seriously. When you think of the world to you automatically think "Good" or "Bad"

You must be absolutely 100% sure of everything huh? What IF you're wrong and you send someone to death for this. Saying that you love someone so much that they (in the case of this) should be killed because they don't believe as you do is morally repugnant. God is not this petty and shallow. Stop making him out to be as such. Again I repeat. It's downright embarassing and decidely un "Christian". Well maybe 14th century Christian I can give that much. Inquisition anyone?

1] The following verses were about people.
2] I have already answered your questions about the other things.
3] There are verses in Romans about how immoral sex with those of the same gender is, and that it is still wrong.
4] Murderers should still get the death penalty? Do you agree? If not, do you at least agree that it should still be a crime? And, also, if you disagree with either of those, why do you disagree?
5] People are basically wicked. We are all born into sin, and only God can make us righteous. He has said so.
6] I'm not a judge, so it is not up to me, so I play no part in the judgment. But, for those who do, if they are wrong they should be held accountable. And if a person accuses someone falsely, then they should suffer the penalty for the crime they accused the person of.
7] This has nothing to do with how one believes. It is about how one lives. And if they are living immoral lives, that are criminal, then they should be punished by the law. And if it is a capital crime, they should get capital punishment. This is not what I say, but what God says.

 

[kmoney]

You asked how I felt. Not what I believed. I may feel differently than God, sometimes, but that's why He's God and I'm not.:chuckle:

"You are God and I'm the man" - Jason Upton

Now, that's what I believe.

I also beleive that the victims have a say in these cases.

However, I believe that a first offense in one area is different than repeated offenses, or serial offenses.

I've never thought of it that way. And as far as the victims having a say that might not be a bad idea, but in practice it might not work very well. The victim may not be in a rational state of mind when making that decision....
but on the other hand they deserve death anyway so even if the victim makes a vengeful decision to have the person killed it's not that bad....

 

[Jadespring]

1] The following verses were about people.
2] I have already answered your questions about the other things.

Not sure I totally see that. The only line I can find that pertains to cleaniness is this which I think does more to contradict your argument then support it.

"And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean. me that I should not call any man common or unclean. "

If this line only pertains to "men of otehr nations" then it doesn't work and if it pertains to every other law (clothing, mensturation etc etc) I don't see any caveat here----*except this and this and this

This particular arguement has and always will be a non starter. Yes it seems that Jesus spoke about the "Jewish purity laws" of the OT, but no where is a specific list that covers them all. Hence we cannot be 100% sure expect for the most blantant. Killing. Thou shalt not kill. Seems pretty clear-not sure how killing people for sex and clothing choices figures into this.
Damn grey area thinking!

 

[Jadespring]

1]
3] There are verses in Romans about how immoral sex with those of the same gender is, and that it is still wrong.

Perhaps, but I don't recall Romans saying we should kill people for it.

 

[Sozo]

Perhaps, but I don't recall Romans saying we should kill people for it.

What do you think should be done?

 

[Army of One]

Perhaps, but I don't recall Romans saying we should kill people for it.

But it does destroy the argument that the law against homosexuality in the OT is just one of many symbolic laws (such as laws against garments of mixed fibers, eating shrimp, etc.). Clearly, homosexuality is a moral issue, just as theft, murder, and kidnapping are.

So, does the inclusion of symbolic laws within the Mosaic covenant negate the moral aspects of it? Do we argue against the prohibition of murder, simply because the same Book which outlaws that act also contains laws of a symbolic nature? Of course not. Rather, we as Christians should examine the Law, to determine which laws were only applicable to the nation of Israel, within their unique covenant with God (ie, circumcision, dietary laws, etc.), and which could be applied to all of mankind (ie, murder, rape, kidnapping, and yes, homosexuality).

 

[Jadespring]

But it does destroy the argument that the law against homosexuality in the OT is just one of many symbolic laws (such as laws against garments of mixed fibers, eating shrimp, etc.). Clearly, homosexuality is a moral issue, just as theft, murder, and kidnapping are.

So, does the inclusion of symbolic laws within the Mosaic covenant negate the moral aspects of it? Do we argue against the prohibition of murder, simply because the same Book which outlaws that act also contains laws of a symbolic nature? Of course not. Rather, we as Christians should examine the Law, to determine which laws were only applicable to the nation of Israel, within their unique covenant with God (ie, circumcision, dietary laws, etc.), and which could be applied to all of mankind (ie, murder, rape, kidnapping, and yes, homosexuality).

So all moral issues should result in the punishment of death? Bull.

And no it does not destroy the arguement at all. This absoluate interpretation of the NT itself is not in itself absolute. Try checking out the numerous studies on the subject. There is no agreement. There has never been 100% agreement on what those NT passages truely refered too. Murder, rape...no brainer there. At one time your list also included prohibitions against women, different behaviors and various other groups of people and behaviors, all of which have changed over the years as we better understand human behaviors and how this world works.
Do I think that murder, rape and kidnapping will ever drop off that list? Nope. Why? Because they're pretty much the only things that everyone agrees upon. If something cannot be 100% determined then no one deserves to die for it. Go ahead a hate them if you must. Relish is the righteousnous of superor morality. Whatever. Just quit this bull about the death penalty. If God has a problem with it. He'll deal with it.

Scripture says adulterers should die. I suppose you must subscribe to this view. Know any adulters? Friends? Family? Perhaps its time we all really get down to business here. Lets start making some lists.

 

[Army of One]

So all moral issues should result in the punishment of death? Bull.

Where in the world did you get that? Of course not everything that is immoral is deserving of execution. I was merely pointing out that homosexuality is a moral issue.

And no it does not destroy the arguement at all. This absoluate interpretation of the NT itself is not in itself absolute. Try checking out the numerous studies on the subject. There is no agreement. There has never been 100% agreement on what those NT passages truely refered too.

So, I can't be correct in my position until everyone else agrees with me?

Murder, rape...no brainer there. At one time your list also included prohibitions against women, different behaviors and various other groups of people and behaviors, all of which have changed over the years as we better understand human behaviors and how this world works.

Well, my list never included those things. And my point was, no one argues against murder and rape being a crime on the basis that it is included among symbolic crimes in the Bible, so why would you use that tactic against the criminalization of homosexuality?

Do I think that murder, rape and kidnapping will ever drop off that list? Nope. Why? Because they're pretty much the only things that everyone agrees upon. If something cannot be 100% determined then no one deserves to die for it. Go ahead a hate them if you must. Relish is the righteousnous of superor morality. Whatever. Just quit this bull about the death penalty. If God has a problem with it. He'll deal with it.

So are you against the punishment of all crime, since "if God has a problem with it, He'll deal with it."? Obviously not. Yet you apply that logic to the act of homosexuality.:think:

Scripture says adulterers should die. I suppose you must subscribe to this view.

You're right. I'm in complete support of re-criminalizing adultery.

Know any adulters? Friends? Family? Perhaps its time we all really get down to business here. Lets start making some lists.

Yes, I do know a few. Yet, I wouldn't compromise what I'm convinced is just, out of an emotional attachment to those I know. In fact, it is that emotional attachment that motivates me to advocate an appropriate sentence for such a crime. Because, if such a penalty existed, I'm confident that my friends and family members that have committed adultery, wouldn't have out of fear for the consequences.

 

[Jadespring]

What do you think should be done?

In regards to what exactly?

I think it's pretty clear I don't think killing people is the answer.

Though I don't think there's a problem. I believe that people have the right to freedom of choice in the matters of the bedroom. It's up to them whop or what moral code they follow. If you want to keep telling people that its wrong and they're going to hell for it. Fine I guess. That's freedom of speech. However as soon as it crosses the line into the "Christian Moral Killzone" as we like to call it goes to far. Bringing people to Christ is not about beating people over the head and crying like a child when they don't listen. If you actually believe that God will judge them poorly for this then it's no skin off your back once you've expressed your view.
Love does not equal killing. I can't understand why this concept is so impossible to get. Do you guys really hate people that much? What ever happened to all of that forgiveness, humilty etc etc that Jesus spoke of ? Guess it's all overruled. Boy is that Satan guy having a heyday right now. Wahoo hate....destruction...gotta love it.
Or maybe its this "warrior Christian" complex that seems to be on the rise. Glad that the West is doing it's part to bring back the dark ages of religious bafflegab and conflict. Yeesh.


Sex acts are not at the same level as "Though shall not kill/murder " else they would have been at the level of the big Ten. Funny enough it's the big Ten which tend to be pretty much universial in scope with most cultures agreeing with most of the law. There has never been such universial agreement on what sex acts are "perversions".
(Except perhaps pedophilia-though disgustingly enough that doesn't always seem to be the case.)

 

[Army of One]

Sex acts are not at the same level as "Though shall not kill/murder " else they would have been at the level of the big Ten.

*ahem* One of the "big Ten" is a sex act (hint: it's the one that says "Thou shalt not commit adultery").

 

[Army of One]

Love does not equal killing.

Love does not equal imprisonment either!

I can't understand why this concept is so impossible to get. Do you guys really hate people that much? What ever happened to all of that forgiveness, humilty etc etc that Jesus spoke of ? Guess it's all overruled. Boy is that Satan guy having a heyday right now. Wahoo hate....destruction...gotta love it.

Forgiveness? You don't advocate forgiveness of criminals, just a different form of punishment! How is putting someone in jail (or whatever you're preferred method of punishment is) considered "forgiving"? Do you hate people that much, that you would lock them away in some cell?