Bible verses clearly condone the Killing of Gays and Witches.

Originally posted by IAMIAM

Jesus did not say the Laws of Moses stay. He fulfilled them.

Fulfill - to bring to an end; finish or complete.

He did not destroy them, but rather made them stricter.

Which is how you know that the way the word "fulfilled" is commonly interpreted is wrong. FUlfill as Jesus used it in the Sermon on the Mount did not mean to "end" but to "fill out" "make more complete and comprehensive."

www.biblestudytools.com...

pleroo

play-ro'-o Verb
Definition

1. to make full, to fill up, i.e. to fill to the full
1. to cause to abound, to furnish or supply liberally
1. I abound, I am liberally supplied
2. to render full, i.e. to complete
1. to fill to the top: so that nothing shall be wanting to full measure, fill to the brim
2. to consummate: a number
1. to make complete in every particular, to render perfect

Jesus did NOT end the requirement to obey Mosaic law, he elaborated upon the law to make them more perfect, and more stringent.

The solution to the problem of Leviticus and Deuteronomy is not to pretend Jesus came to end the requirement to follow Mosaic law, clearly he did not, he explicitly SAYS he did not, it is to realize that Moses had nothing to do with the writing of Leviticus and Deuteronomy. They were written AFTER Moses' death and attributed to him by the priests.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by halfoldman

 

So? It also advocates stoning adulterers to death as well as unruly children.

I get so sick of the selective reading of the Bible.

www.openbible.info...

Leviticus 20:9

For anyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death; he has cursed his father or his mother; his blood is upon him.

Deuteronomy 21:18-21

“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

www.answering-christianity.com...

Deuteronomy 22:22 "If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die."

Leviticus 20:10 "If a man commits adultery with another man's wife--with the wife of his neighbor--both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death."

edit on 21-4-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)

John 8
1 but Jesus went to the Mount of Olives.
2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

11 “No one, sir,” she said.

“Then neither do I condemn you,” Jesus declared. “Go now and leave your life of sin.”

reply to post by FreedomNow


Jesus also commanded people not to judge, and that doesnt seem to stop many Christians from judging homosexuals, does it?

Selective application. And, if you want to get downright technical about it, that wonderful story of Jesus saving the adultress from stoning doesnt appear in any of the earliest copies of the scriptures. It may be that it was omitted for political reasons, and later added back in, or it may be it is just an addition that has nothing to do with the truth of what Jesus actually did.

en.wikipedia.org...

The pericope is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. It is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it; 17 of the 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8 contain at least part of the Pericope. Papias (circa AD 125) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope adulterae in the 3rd Century Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum; though without indicating John's Gospel.

And, even if you want to use this to justify not stoning adulterers, can we still stone unruly children? Lord knows there have been some times in restaurants I was tempted...............

reply to post by halfoldman

OK, gentiles were excused from circumcision and diet laws.

After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people

For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another

For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.

Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven.

In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away.

And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit.

(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.

Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.

remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ

built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone

One shall say, I am the LORD's; and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob; and another shall subscribe with his hand unto the LORD, and surname himself by the name of Israel.

The only clear change was that the parameters of adultery and divorce were narrowed

Know ye not, brethren, (for I speak to them that know the law,) how that the law hath dominion over a man as long as he liveth? For the woman which hath an husband is bound by the law to her husband so long as he liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed from the law of her husband. So then if, while her husband liveth, she be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress: but if her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no adulteress, though she be married to another man.

Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God. For when we were in the flesh, the motions of sins, which were aroused by the law, did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter. What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet. But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died. And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death. For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good. Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful. For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. For that which I do I allow not: for what I would, that do I not; but what I hate, that do I.
If then I do that which I would not, I consent unto the law that it is good.

Now then it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.

I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man: But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Which two women are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God

Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well

for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

And the law is not of faith: but, The man that doeth them shall live in them.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by FreedomNow

 

Jesus also commanded people not to judge, and that doesnt seem to stop many Christians from judging homosexuals, does it?

Selective application. And, if you want to get downright technical about it, that wonderful story of Jesus saving the adultress from stoning doesnt appear in any of the earliest copies of the scriptures. It may be that it was omitted for political reasons, and later added back in, or it may be it is just an addition that has nothing to do with the truth of what Jesus actually did.

en.wikipedia.org...

The pericope is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. It is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it; 17 of the 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8 contain at least part of the Pericope. Papias (circa AD 125) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope adulterae in the 3rd Century Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum; though without indicating John's Gospel.

And, even if you want to use this to justify not stoning adulterers, can we still stone unruly children? Lord knows there have been some times in restaurants I was tempted...............

edit on 21-4-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)

Matthew 5 - Jesus Says...

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by FreedomNow

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by FreedomNow

 

Jesus also commanded people not to judge, and that doesnt seem to stop many Christians from judging homosexuals, does it?

Selective application. And, if you want to get downright technical about it, that wonderful story of Jesus saving the adultress from stoning doesnt appear in any of the earliest copies of the scriptures. It may be that it was omitted for political reasons, and later added back in, or it may be it is just an addition that has nothing to do with the truth of what Jesus actually did.

en.wikipedia.org...

The pericope is not found in its canonical place in any of the earliest surviving Greek Gospel manuscripts; neither in the two 3rd century papyrus witnesses to John - P66 and P75; nor in the 4th century Codex Sinaiticus and Vaticanus, although all four of these manuscripts may acknowledge the existence of the passage via diacritical marks at the spot. The first surviving Greek manuscript to contain the pericope is the Latin/Greek diglot Codex Bezae of the late 4th or early 5th century. It is also the earliest surviving Latin manuscript to contain it; 17 of the 23 Old Latin manuscripts of John 7-8 contain at least part of the Pericope. Papias (circa AD 125) refers to a story of Jesus and a woman "accused of many sins" as being found in the Gospel of the Hebrews, which may well refer to this passage; there is a very certain quotation of the pericope adulterae in the 3rd Century Syriac Didascalia Apostolorum; though without indicating John's Gospel.

And, even if you want to use this to justify not stoning adulterers, can we still stone unruly children? Lord knows there have been some times in restaurants I was tempted...............

edit on 21-4-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)

Matthew 5 - Jesus Says...

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

Matthew 7 - Jesus Says...

1Judge not, that ye be not judged.

2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.

3And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

4Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?

5Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

reply to post by ninjawolf420


Well Mr Wizard

Instead of insults and a wall of almost unreadable gibberish I will just say the Law of The Old Testament covered MUCH more than just the 10 Comabdments......but someone as obviously as intellegent as you who has studided the Bible for a lifetime.....or at least during Hogwarts summer vaction.......... already knows that

reply to post by FreedomNow


Why are you posting random unrelated Bible quotes? Are you that drunk Revered Schnorr from the Jerry Springer show?

Who is angry? Im sure not. Im just pointing out that there are some flaws in the arguments.

reply to post by halfoldman


Since when did God commit judgment to man? Throughout the scriptures and in each faith you are told to love the sinner but hate the sin. Who among you can claim to discern righteousness, let alone be worthy of judging another? If these things were not prophecied to be they would not have become. There is a testimony that sheds light on this subject; go to it, waterofshiloh.com..., and be enlightened.

reply to post by FreedomNow


Im proud of you. So you do not judge homosexuals.

I dont know why you are posting to me then. And really, two things. One, you are not supposed to be quoting someone elses entire post, repeatedly. Read the TnC. It just takes up a lot of room on the screen for nothing. And secondly, if you are trying to make a point to me, dont be so lazy that you contribute nothing at all yourself. I know the Bible better than you do. I know what Jesus said. You should accompany it with what YOU want to say too, or else you are just wasting pixels posting a conversation between me and Jesus, with no involvement of your own, other than to post it.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by FreedomNow

 

Why are you posting random unrelated Bible quotes? Are you that drunk Revered Schnorr from the Jerry Springer show?

Who is angry? Im sure not. Im just pointing out that there are some flaws in the arguments.

You said something about stoning children... I'm telling you no...

Wow. It's impossible to talk pragmatics with people talking dogma.
What stated out as a discussion ended up with people throwing Bible verses at each other.
At least we've evolved a little and aren't monkeys throwing feces back and forth.

Using the Bible to prove or disprove things about the Bible is tedious, lazy, and obnoxiously circular.

We all have a right to live until we start hurting anyone.
And contrary to mob opinion, we certainly don't need a Bible or a God to understand that or to be nice,

Morality should be the result of intelligence not the rules for it.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by FreedomNow

 

Im proud of you. So you do not judge homosexuals.

I dont know why you are posting to me then. And really, two things. One, you are not supposed to be quoting someone elses entire post, repeatedly. Read the TnC. It just takes up a lot of room on the screen for nothing. And secondly, if you are trying to make a point to me, dont be so lazy that you contribute nothing at all yourself. I know the Bible better than you do. I know what Jesus said. You should accompany it with what YOU want to say too, or else you are just wasting pixels posting a conversation between me and Jesus, with no involvement of your own, other than to post it.

I am not God therefore I do not judge...

You don't know a thing about me... how can you assume you know the Bible better than I... and if you did I wouldn't need to correct you...

What better way to get a point across then the words directly from Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior? I'm sorry you think they are meaningless words and a waste of pixels... one day you may be sorry you said that. And if you knew the Bible you would be aware of that too.

Originally posted by spacegod
Wow. It's impossible to talk pragmatics with people talking dogma.
What stated out as a discussion ended up with people throwing Bible verses at each other.
At least we've evolved a little and aren't monkeys throwing feces back and forth.

Using the Bible to prove or disprove things about the Bible is tedious, lazy, and obnoxiously circular.

We all have a right to live until we start hurting anyone.
And contrary to mob opinion, we certainly don't need a Bible or a God to understand that or to be nice,

Morality should be the result of intelligence not the rules for it.

Certainly if you don't want to go to Heaven you can think and agree with anything you want... God is not going to force you to Love him... he was brutally beaten for you people and you could care less

This is called a sick psychopath looking for an excuse to kill.

He put rocks and batteries in a sock and then hit a 70 yr old man in the head with it until he was dead? Uh sure, give me a minute while I look up that verse in the bible.

Please....this has NOTHING to do with the bible and God.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by IAMIAM
Ok, I see where you are coming from so thanks for sharing. That review has a lot of bias and misunderstanding in it. I would counter it, but that would only throw this topic off course.

When I get the time to do so, I will write a similar unbiased (I am neither atheist nor christian) look at the sermon on the mount and explain why I think it is logical sound advice.

Would be interested in joining such a discussion if and when I do so?

With Love,

Your Brother

I see bias but not misunderstanding. We could go over that topic if you wish though I don't find much interesting about the SOTM. I would largely parrot the viewpoint in that link.

Ok my friend, I have given my interpretation. It has my own bias which is simply a love for all.

The Sermon on the Mount

If you have any questions, feel free to ask. I am not trying to sway your opinion, merely sharing my view. In the end, all I want is for an end to the fighting amongst Brethren.

With Love,

Your Brother

reply to post by halfoldman


This is one of the problems of our modern day society, and the churches. People read the Scriptures and get to the 'Old Covenant' rules and commandments and figure we should follow that. Well, before you get all up tight over the verses in the old testament, there is a new testament that we are supposed to be following. I dont have time to explain all this, but heres a small breakdown.

We have to understand in 'those days' of Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Elijah etc, were commanded by Yahuwah( the real name of God) to punish those who broke the law ie. the 10 commandments.
The 10 commandments was called the 'Law of sin and death', those who broke it, were stone, hanged, be-headed etc. But, after many years until Israel became corrupted by their own sin, they were thrown into captivity of Nebukadnetser of Babylon and the covenant was broken. Now that covenant was broken, a 'New Covenant' had to be re-issued to the people of Israel. This was the prophecy of the Messiah Yahuwshuwah(who the lying scholars call Jesus- Je-zeus).

The Messiah Yahuwshwuah brought the New Covenant to the people and all the Gentiles (the others who were not Yahudim(Jews)) to love one another, not to judge by the old covenant, give to one another, and be led by the Set-Apart Spirit, and not the 10 commandments. This is called the Righteousness of the Law. The Isrealites of Moses' day were under the "letter of the Law".

So we don't stone those who break the law, cause we are not the judge, Yahuwshuwah is. Like it says in John 8:7 "But as they kept on questioning Him, He straightened up and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

We arent under the old covenant, we are under a new covenant to love one another and to forgive.

Originally posted by kove400
reply to post by halfoldman

 

This is one of the problems of our modern day society, and the churches. People read the Scriptures and get to the 'Old Covenant' rules and commandments and figure we should follow that. Well, before you get all up tight over the verses in the old testament, there is a new testament that we are supposed to be following. I dont have time to explain all this, but heres a small breakdown.

We have to understand in 'those days' of Moses, David, Solomon, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Elijah etc, were commanded by Yahuwah( the real name of God) to punish those who broke the law ie. the 10 commandments.
The 10 commandments was called the 'Law of sin and death', those who broke it, were stone, hanged, be-headed etc. But, after many years until Israel became corrupted by their own sin, they were thrown into captivity of Nebukadnetser of Babylon and the covenant was broken. Now that covenant was broken, a 'New Covenant' had to be re-issued to the people of Israel. This was the prophecy of the Messiah Yahuwshuwah(who the lying scholars call Jesus- Je-zeus).

The Messiah Yahuwshwuah brought the New Covenant to the people and all the Gentiles (the others who were not Yahudim(Jews)) to love one another, not to judge by the old covenant, give to one another, and be led by the Set-Apart Spirit, and not the 10 commandments. This is called the Righteousness of the Law. The Isrealites of Moses' day were under the "letter of the Law".

So we don't stone those who break the law, cause we are not the judge, Yahuwshuwah is. Like it says in John 8:7 "But as they kept on questioning Him, He straightened up and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her."

We arent under the old covenant, we are under a new covenant to love one another and to forgive.

Matthew 5 - Jesus Says...

17Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

19Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

20For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

21Ye have heard that it was said of them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:

22But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

23Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;

24Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift.

25Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.

26Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

27Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

28But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.

29And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

30And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

31It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:

32But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.

33Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

38Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:

39But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also.

41And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.

42Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not thou away.

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

46For if ye love them which love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?

47And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even the publicans so?

48Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.

reply to post by FreedomNow


If you would follow the rules of ATS and not quote entire posts of other people, with no input of your own to clarify your point, maybe we would not even need to have this exchange.

If you made it clear to me WHAT you were replying to in the first place, I could tell you that it was a joke. I really dont want to stone children, and then there would be no need for the other posts where you contribute nothing of your own.

I never argued that what Jesus said was not meaningful. Only that your disregard for the norms of posting made it pointless. Make your own point. If you are arguing against something I said, be specific, so I can reply in a meaningful way. Use scripture to bolster your point if you wish, but dont just post scripture with no contribution of your own. I know what Jesus said. What I dont know is what YOUR point is. Mostly, because you decline to provide it.