Your opinion on God’s Law.

[Jacob]

So, how do "the courts" carry out a death penalty? Is that murder?

And you still don't understand what I'm saying--It isn't "taking matters into their own hands" if the courts sanction it.

If courts can, you would not be carrying it out for them.

 

[meshak]

Was Jesus a pacifist? How do you know that?

How do I know?

from His preaching and from His practice.

Do your pay attention to Jesus teachings and how He showed example to follow Him? It seems you are not reading much of His word.

Here is His famous teaching:

Luke 6:27-36 King James Version)

27But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
28Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you.
29And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer also the other; and him that taketh away thy cloak forbid not to take thy coat also.
30Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again.
31And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise.
32For if ye love them which love you what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. 33And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same.
34And if ye to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again.
35But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.
36Be ye therefore merciful, as your Fatheralso is merciful.

further more, Jesus did not harm anyone not even for self-defense.'

You really need to read His word, friend.

 

[meshak]

Derf,

suggest you to read my thread about pacifism for Christians.

Here:

http://theologyonline.com/showthread.php?117326-pacifism-for-true-Jesus-followers

blessings.

 

[Derf]

How do I know?

from His preaching and from His practice.

Do your pay attention to Jesus teachings and how He showed example to follow Him? It seems you are not reading much of His word.

Here is His famous teaching:



further more, Jesus did not harm anyone not even for self-defense.'

You really need to read His word, friend.

You conveniently left off any comment about the other part of my response. Did you want to talk about that part at all, or do we just pretend that that stuff didn't happen? Is God schizophrenic?

 

[meshak]

You conveniently left off any comment about the other part of my response. Did you want to talk about that part at all, or do we just pretend that that stuff didn't happen? Is God schizophrenic?

Your post was too lengthy.

I picked the most imporatant part that you need to consider.

 

[PureX]

Your opinion on God’s Law. Do you believe God’s Law is only for pointing out sin in a person’s life so that they can understand their need for a Savior and be saved by God and Jesus? Or, do you believe God’s Law is also to be obeyed, or is also for our obedience?

I don't believe God has put forth any "laws" beyond the laws of nature. And even those, I suspect, are as much a necessity of function as they are an expression of divine will.

However, I do believe that God has offered us a plethora of choices, from the most basic and fundamental to the most insignificant and nonchalant. And the reason we are given so many choices throughout the course of our lives appears to be so that we can determine for ourselves who we are and who we will become; through the choices we make.

But I know you religionists don't want to read any of this, because you all are obsessed with laws and obedience above all else. So I won't bother to elaborate any further.

 

[Derf]

Your post was too lengthy.

I picked the most imporatant part that you need to consider.

Sure--that was a good part for me to consider, but you should consider the other part, if we are to have any meaningful dialog.

If my post is too lengthy, is it possible that the whole record of Jesus, including His heritage, the prophecies concerning Him, and His eternal coexistence with his Father, as well as how He says He is one with the Father, was too lengthy for you and so you've ignored it?

Or is it just that when you read something that disagrees with your position, you conveniently ignore it? Not a good way to learn, imo.

How can a strict pacifist be "one" with someone so seemingly warlike as Jehovah?

 

[meshak]

If my post is too lengthy, is it possible that the whole record of Jesus, including His heritage, the prophecies concerning Him, and His eternal coexistence with his Father, as well as how He says He is one with the Father, was too lengthy for you and so you've ignored it?

Nope, you are ignoring many of Jesus' word. That's what I am pointing out.

And you are still avoiding it.

You are just dancing around meaninglessly with lengthy talk without making a point...

 

[Derf]

Nope, you are ignoring many of Jesus' word. That's what I am pointing out.

And you are still avoiding it.

You are just dancing around meaninglessly with lengthy talk without making a point...

No, I made a point, but it seems like you don't want to deal with it. My point was that God, who sent Jesus Christ, also told His "children" (Israel) to go to battle on multiple occasions. If Jesus really is one with God (I'm pretty sure I remember reading that somewhere in Jesus' statements), can His purposes and nature be so different as you suggest? Or is it possible that Jesus came in a role of pacificity for a specific purpose--to be lead as a sheep to the slaughter?

Ignoring half of what Jesus said, as well as most of the rest of the bible that was inspired by God, hardly seems like a way to promote Jesus' teachings.

 

[meshak]

No, I made a point, but it seems like you don't want to deal with it.

I am trying to show you how you are avoiding Jesus' word and you continually dancing around with it.

Jesus was pacifist and you refuse to see it. You are clearly and deliberately avoiding Jesus' word.

I have been trying to figure out where your ideas are coming from. Now I know. You are just playing scholar.

there are many, many playing scholars in the forums.

I don't convers too much with them..

 

[Derf]

I am trying to show you how you are avoiding Jesus' word and you continually dancing around with it.

Jesus was pacifist and you refuse to see it. You are clearly and deliberately avoiding Jesus' word.

I have been trying to figure out where your ideas are coming from. Now I know. You are just playing scholar.

there are many, many playing scholars in the forums.

I don't convers too much with them..

Maybe you should. Sometimes scholars actually study the words of Jesus in light of the rest of the bible, and come to conclusions that are different from yours. It seems instead that if someone tells you something you disagree with, you call them a "scholar" and disregard what they say.

Is that what you want people to do to you? Jesus said "Do unto others as you would like them to do unto you." Based on that and on your last post, it seems like you want me to say "you're playing scholar" and ignore everything you've said. If you really want to discuss these topics, then you need to actually read what others write, and deal with those things, even if it turns out you are wrong.

Even worse than ignoring you in these forums, what if a person heard you explain the gospel and replied with: "You're just talking like a Christian, therefore I won't listen to you." That person, doing what you seem to advocate doing, would then be condemned to hell through his own refusal to listen to the words of life.

Prior to this, I've answered your questions with specific scripture, including Jesus' own words, and you still don't seem to want to hear what I've said (which seems to indicate you don't want to hear what Jesus and Paul and others said). I'll try one more time, making it a little shorter and see if you really want to engage in the conversation or just want to preach your message without any discussion.

You said:

Stop it there. where did Paul says to bear the sword?

reference please.

I replied with a direct answer to your question:

It wasn't a command to bear the sword, it was a statement that the state (or "rulers") bear the sword as ministers of God.

Romans 13:3-5

3 For rulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but for evil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what is good and you will have praise from the same; 4 for it is a minister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, be afraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it is a minister of God, an avenger who brings wrath on the one who practices evil. 5 Therefore it is necessary to be in subjection, not only because of wrath, but also for conscience' sake.…

From this, we should be able to state that "ministers of God" are allowed to bear the sword, at least in some instances.

You said:

I ask you which part is indicating approving of His follower have obligation to bear arm specifially?

I replied with a direct answer to your question (though accompanied by other comments and citations):

You were looking for an "obligation" to bear arms specifically? Here it is--a command from Jesus to go buy swords:

[Luk 22:36, 38 ESV] 36 He said to them, "But now let the one who has a moneybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. ... 38 And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them, "It is enough."

From this, we should be able to say that it is ok for Jesus' followers to carry swords, though not all have to do so.

I've done you the honor of directly addressing your questions. Would you do me the honor to directly address my answers to your questions before calling me a "play scholar" and disregarding what I've written?

 

[Jacob]

I don't believe God has put forth any "laws" beyond the laws of nature. And even those, I suspect, are as much a necessity of function as they are an expression of divine will.

However, I do believe that God has offered us a plethora of choices, from the most basic and fundamental to the most insignificant and nonchalant. And the reason we are given so many choices throughout the course of our lives appears to be so that we can determine for ourselves who we are and who we will become; through the choices we make.

But I know you religionists don't want to read any of this, because you all are obsessed with laws and obedience above all else. So I won't bother to elaborate any further.

God has given us commands to observe. Those who do not (or have not (only Jesus is excepted here as He never sinned ever)) have transgressed God's Law and are in need of Jesus to be their Savior. In Him you can have salvation, the forgiveness of all your sins.

 

[Derf]

If courts can, you would not be carrying it out for them.

Hi Jacob. I apologize, for not writing back sooner. I thought I did, but I can't find it.

"Courts" don't really carry out any kind of punishment. People do. So if the punishment is supposed to be death, then a person or a group of people would have to carry out that sentence. The Old Testament is full of descriptions of how that was to be done, sometimes by stoning, sometimes by fire, almost always as a group, except in the case of the avenger of blood, where it isn't specified how he was to do it.

So while it might not be me carrying it out for the court, someone (or "someones" plural) would be carrying it out for the court.

Is that ok in your mind? Or is the Torah wrong to say such?

 

[Jacob]

Hi Jacob. I apologize, for not writing back sooner. I thought I did, but I can't find it.

"Courts" don't really carry out any kind of punishment. People do. So if the punishment is supposed to be death, then a person or a group of people would have to carry out that sentence. The Old Testament is full of descriptions of how that was to be done, sometimes by stoning, sometimes by fire, almost always as a group, except in the case of the avenger of blood, where it isn't specified how he was to do it.

So while it might not be me carrying it out for the court, someone (or "someones" plural) would be carrying it out for the court.

Is that ok in your mind? Or is the Torah wrong to say such?

A court involves people just as a judge is a person (is the judge the court?). Rather than trying to punish someone yourself leave it to the court.

You should study what the Torah says.

 

[Derf]

A court involves people just as a judge is a person (is the judge the court?). Rather than trying to punish someone yourself leave it to the court.

You should study what the Torah says.

I get the feeling that we're talking past each other. I asked you if it is ok with you if a person or persons carry out the sentence declared by the court. And you answered, if I understand your answer correctly, "No, a person from the court should do it." But that would mean your answer is really "yes", because whether a person is from the court or not, he is still a person.

Let me ask my question another way:
Is it ok with you that a person (from the court), executes another person?

 

[Jacob]

I get the feeling that we're talking past each other. I asked you if it is ok with you if a person or persons carry out the sentence declared by the court. And you answered, if I understand your answer correctly, "No, a person from the court should do it." But that would mean your answer is really "yes", because whether a person is from the court or not, he is still a person.

Let me ask my question another way:
Is it ok with you that a person (from the court), executes another person?

I am not approving of this. What I told you is that you are not to avenge the death of another claiming to be part of the court. You are not the judge and you are not the court. I don't even know if you are a witness to anything. Are you differentiating between judge and jury?

 

[Derf]

I asked:

Let me ask my question another way:
Is it ok with you that a person (from the court), executes another person?

And you answered:

I am not approving of this.

Then how does any death sentence by any court get carried out?

 

[Choleric]

Nope, you are ignoring many of Jesus' word. That's what I am pointing out.

And you are still avoiding it.

You are just dancing around meaninglessly with lengthy talk without making a point...

Here are Jesus' words:

Luk 22:36 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one

 

[Jacob]

I asked:


And you answered:


Then how does any death sentence by any court get carried out?

I don't have that authority Derf. Neither do you. There can be a question about what this should look like if anything in the new covenant which has already come. Is the old covenant still in place and only called old because of the coming of a new covenant?

 

[eider]

Your opinion on God’s Law. Do you believe God’s Law is only for pointing out sin in a person’s life so that they can understand their need for a Savior and be saved by God and Jesus? Or, do you believe God’s Law is also to be obeyed, or is also for our obedience?

Hi....
I'm late to this thread.
God's Law? You mean the 600+ laws of Exodus, Leviticus, Deuteronomy..? those laws?

All of those laws, the whole lot, from a ban on eating shellfish, to rules about free 'grazing' during harvesting, to rules of marriage and sexual behaviour etc, the whole lot, were EXACTLY what was required in order to protect and strengthen the Israelite peoples AT THAT TIME!

Even in Jesus's time most of those rules were important, although the rich upper classes had ignored them in favour of fashionable Hellenism etc.

But today some of those rules no longer need apply.

And so, if you believe in those old Israelite laws you should keep the lot, every one.... and no cherry picking. Or, alternatively, you can pay more attention to modern legislation in the countries that you reside in.

No cherry picking!