Bible verses clearly condone the Killing of Gays and Witches.

The Prince Of Peace is gonna be pissed about this
-

reply to post by semperfortis


Thanks

There are even more verses that explain why the OT is no longer valid as a scource ot rules for Christians.....never was really, was for Jews.

Anyhow after some sleep I will look them up

reply to post by lastrebel


I agree 100%. My point is we cannot possibly follow those old laws as there will be a lot of death going round. (Well more than there is already...)

It was also socially acceptable to kill Jesus in the bible as well. The words of Jesus portrayed a lot of love and wisdom, the rest just helps explain this messed up world we are all in.

reply to post by lastrebel

No, I would say there are none.
At least none that make any sense in a literal reading.
OK, gentiles were excused from circumcision and diet laws.
(All based on Peter's trance in Acts - Jesus never said this.)
Let us also remember that "Jew" was not a word used at that time.

The only clear change was that the parameters of adultery and divorce were narrowed (Matt 5:31-32), and Jesus said some men are born "not attracted to women", and they shouldn't be forced to marry.
(Matt 19:12.)

Gays are OK, but straight divorce is the highway to hell.

reply to post by halfoldman


Always thought if the Bible and God did not seek out vengeance for Cain who murdered Gods favorite child Abel and buried him in a field, there is nothing worthy of our own vengeance. It is just not called for. Amish, Quakers maybe a few other religious groups of people seem to be the only ones that know this.

reply to post by newcovenant

Was there a favorite?
I just read the passage, and the Lord merely prefers the sacrifice of animals (Abel the shepherd), rather than plants (Cain the tiller of soil).
Even after Cain murders his brother, God puts a special mark on him that he must not be harmed, and he lives out his long days impregnating lots of women (who appeared from somewhere) in the land of Nod.
(Genesis 4:15-16).
I suppose he's in heaven now too.

Originally posted by halfoldman
Well, if unwanted advances are an excuse to kill people, then why not Exodus 22:18?

Though shalt not suffer a witch to live.

Oh that's my favorite one to wave in the face of the bible thumpers.

reply to post by halfoldman


I think yes. en.wikipedia.org...

Though Genesis depicts Cain's motive in killing Abel as simply being one of jealousy concerning God's favour for Abel,

www.newadvent.org...
(Abel)

is canonized by Christ himself (Matthew 23:34-35) as the first of the long line of prophets martyred for justice' sake. He prophesied not by word, but by his sacrifice, of which he knew by revelation the typical meaning (Vigouroux); and also by his death (City of God XV.18). In Hebrews 12:24, his death is mentioned, and the contrast between his blood and that of Christ is shown. The latter calls not for vengeance, but for mercy and pardon. Abel, though dead, speaketh (Hebrews 11:4), Deo per merita, hominibus per exemplum (Piconio), i.e. to God by his merits, to men by his example. For a rabbinic interpretation of the plural Hebrew meaning "bloods", in Genesis 4:10, see Mishna San., IV, 5, where it is said to refer to Abel and to his seed.

reply to post by halfoldman



Jesus never repelled the Law.

He pointed out the technicality that people don't have the right to judge others because we are imperfect and forgave her after.

John 8 1 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

reply to post by halfoldman

Mark 2:27 (New International Version, ©2011) 27 Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.

reply to post by bobbobulau

Jesus never repelled the Law.

bible.cc...
No. But he came to complete the law, as it referenced here/
bible.cc... Clarks review of Biblical passage:

Think not that I am come to destroy the law - Do not imagine that I am come to violate the law καταλυσαι, from κατα, and λυω, I loose, violate, or dissolve - I am not come to make the law of none effect - to dissolve the connection which subsists between its several parts, or the obligation men are under to have their lives regulated by its moral precepts; nor am I come to dissolve the connecting reference it has to the good things promised. But I am come, πληρωσαι, to complete - to perfect its connection and reference, to accomplish every thing shadowed forth in the Mosaic ritual, to fill up its great design; and to give grace to all my followers, πληρωσαι, to fill up, or complete, every moral duty. In a word, Christ completed the law:

Cross references to clarify the meaning of this

Matthew 7:12 So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.

Romans 3:31 Do we, then, nullify the law by this faith? Not at all! Rather, we uphold the law.

"For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith --and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God-- not by works, so that no one can boast. (Ephesians. 2:8, 9)

reply to post by halfoldman


It may be a hard read but God rejected Cain offerings because he wasn't offering his best like Able was. Not because God was only likes animal offerings.

Basically as the saying goes "It's the thought that counts"

So Cain was jealous of Able and killed him.

3And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD. 4And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering: 5But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell. 6And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen? 7If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him. 8And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. 9And the LORD said unto Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not: Am I my brother's keeper? 10And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.

I guess this is what happens when people are so stupid, they need to learn the difference between right and wrong from a book. Instead of actually knowing that it is wrong to hurt people. They justify their actions from a 2000 year old book, written in a completly different time and try to apply it to todays world. Stupidity gone wild.

reply to post by lastrebel

On what exactly?
Please expand a bit here, and I'm saying that from sincere interest.

reply to post by Acidtastic


Well at least I'm not they guy who lives in a Western society and thinks that my notions of right and wrong didn't come from this 2000 year old book.

reply to post by bobbobulau

Once again, where is the verse?
Where does anybody read that Cain's offering was laid with lesser intention?
Well, until the point of Jesus, God makes it CLEAR that He only wants animal sacrifices!

You can offer vegetarian food to Krishna, but not to Jehovah.
He likes the blood.

reply to post by newcovenant


Agreed,

Thanks for the post

Growing up in a Southern Baptist family, I was told often that "The Bible is the divinely inspired word of GOD. It is not open to interpretation or mistakes!" So obviously, I made no friends when I asked how you can translate from Hebrew, Latin, or Greek into English without interpreting the authors meaning, given that the sentance structure and words are not the same.

Anyway, some bits to chew on for fun...

מכשפה is the word in question in Exodus in the Torah. This word means Sorceress when
translated. First off the word is feminine by nature, so this is not speaking of a male.
Secondly מכשפה is pronounced m'khashepah in Hebrew, and the direct meaning of
m'khashepah is the following.

In the original Hebrew manuscript, the author used the word m'khashepah to describe the
person who should be killed. The word means a woman who uses spoken spells to harm
others - e.g. Causing their death or loss of property. Clearly "evil sorceress" or
"woman who does evil magic" would be the most accurate phrases in today's English usage
for this verse

notzrimkabbalah.com...

At first, we were unable to find any logical explanation that would justify conservative Christians concentrating so much on these two laws against homosexuality while abandoning most of the remaining 611 Mosaic laws.

But further examination found the reason. Using an Protestant English translation of the Bible, conservative Christians believe that the validity of the two anti-homosexual "clobber" passages in Leviticus has been verified by passages in Paul's Epistles. The NIV and KJV of the Bible clearly condemn homosexual behavior at 1 Corinthians 6:9 and Romans 1:28 in the Christian Scriptures. These translations generally interpret the Greek words "malakoi" and "arsenokoitai" as referring to homosexuals.

We can be fairly certain that this is not the meaning that Paul wanted to convey. If he had, he would have used the Greek word "paiderasste."

www.religioustolerance.org...

If this opens to the page I got the first time it is an interesting reference too. Hope this link works. pg 87

"You have heard it said love your neighbor and hate your enemy but I say love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"

Matt 5:43 Which was a change from the old law. Also by Moses law prostitutes were routinely stoned to death but Jesus relied on a little known existing law that required accusers be without fault in a manner as serious as this. The scribes and pharisees tested Jesus adherence to Mosaic Law by seeking his judgment in the matter of the prostitutes. John 7:53 -8-11

what is most impressive is that Christ answered the question in a proper legal manner

books.google.com... e5hLOR7c3bI&hl=en&ei=rj-wTf54yOjRAYDAmYUJ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2&sqi=2&ved=0CBsQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=jesus%20the%20law%20repeals%20the%2 0law%20of%20moses&f=false