Why don't christians follow the laws of Leviticus and kill homosexuals, adulterers, etc.?

a reply to: DISRAELI

Honestly i haven't heard a lot of great things about this OT character

a reply to: Akragon
That is partly because you have chosen not to hear them. Nothing I can do about that.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Not to hear what... do you really believe i have no idea what im talking about?

As IF everything that people say about said entity is positive?

Or is it that you believe i just misunderstand?

a reply to: Akragon
I believe that you are willing to ignore anything good that is said about the artificial entity "the god of the Old Testament only" that you have decided to create. That includes the whole of what is said about him in the New Testament.
The relationship between the two testaments is more subtle than you are willing to understand.
Since "willing" is the operative word, there is no point in arguing about it. Nobody but you can get past that barrier.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Fair enough... not really sure what "good" you might be talking about...

but its not a barrier... nor is what i've read within said books "artificial"

the impression is not a creation of my mind but of what i've read, which is extensive...

what is said about this entity in the NT is Vague to say the least, especially considering said books come from those of that religion to begin with...

The relationship between the two testaments is more subtle than you are willing to understand.

thats actually one of the huge problems...

why would it be subtle... In your religion, its the same guy(s) throughout the whole book... except if one actually reads the book, having know knowledge of Christianity... the conclusions would be far different every single time

Since "willing" is the operative word, there is no point in arguing about it. Nobody but you can get past that barrier.

well again i disagree only because in the Christian mind... "Willing" basically means except or perish...

I've been through the "accept" our beliefs thing too many times

And considering this same guy according to Christians wasn't a "Christian"

well...

yet theres no reason not to discuss said situation... Unless you're afraid brother

there is even a Thread for this discussion

a reply to: Akragon
The basic outline of the situation is fairly simple, which is why the main obstacle to understanding it is the will.
The Bible derives from two factors- God and the human element.
Whatever is good there comes from God.
Whatever is not good comes from the human element.
That is why Christians (keeping firmly to the thread topic) do not demand the stoning of adulterers. Following the example of Jesus and the advice of Paul, they distinguish between the two factors and identify "the stoning of adulterers" as coming from the human element.
As Paul says, we are no longer living by "the old written code", which combines the two factors, but "by the Spirit", which helps the church to discern the difference.

a reply to: DISRAELI

The basic outline of the situation is fairly simple, which is why the main obstacle to understanding it is the will.
The Bible derives from two factors- God and the human element.

Let me first say i love to read your replies... and your threads my friend

and what you said is true

Whatever is good there comes from God.
Whatever is not good comes from the human element.

So... this means we can not do anything good of ourselves... unless this "god" is involved?

That is why Christians (keeping firmly to the thread topic) do not demand the stoning of adulterers. Following the example of Jesus and the advice of Paul, they distinguish between the two factors and identify "the stoning of adulterers" as coming from the human element.

True...

and apparently at least one of them learned from said practice

As Paul says, we are no longer living by "the old written code", which combines the two factors, but "by the Spirit", which helps the church to discern the difference.

i seem to recall a Jot and tittle verse somewhere in that book

a reply to: craig732

cherry picking hypocricy .

originally posted by: Akragon
i seem to recall a Jot and tittle verse somewhere in that book

Do you also recall the earlier thread where we agreed (and you resented agreeing) that Jesus and Paul were in the same mind on the status of the old law?
This ought now to be a settled point.
As illustrated by the fact that Jesus was not keen on stoning adulterers either.

originally posted by: DISRAELI

originally posted by: Akragon
i seem to recall a Jot and tittle verse somewhere in that book

Do you also recall the earlier thread where we agreed (and you resented agreeing) that Jesus and Paul were in the same mind on the status of the old law?
This ought now to be a settled point.
As illustrated by the fact that Jesus was not keen on stoning adulterers either.

Absolutely...

except these two men had far different agendas and doctrine

Yeah, one of them finally figured out that smashing people with rocks isn't a great idea...

even though he seemed to believe it was an excellent idea in his earlier life

again... there are better places we might take this discussion to...

Why? For the same reason we don't kick menstruating women out of our homes.

a reply to: Akragon

You realize the Bible covers thousands of years, right? How could it be "the same guy(s)" throughout the whole book?

a reply to: jtma508

hahahahahahahahaha

Christians let a Book tell them how to live their life. Manchurian Candidate would be a soft way to describe the chauvinism that blinds these people.

It's always the same conversation though-
-"Hey -MAN!-, Why are you so uptight?"
'BECAUSE I WANT TO DEFEND 'MURICA TO THE FOUNDATIONS OF MY SOUUULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL'
"Oh...Okay...Well, I like America so far too."




But at some point, you have to understand, none of that is at risk.

originally posted by: TheManFromTaured
a reply to: Akragon

You realize the Bible covers thousands of years, right? How could it be "the same guy(s)" throughout the whole book?

ask them.... the answer is easy if one knows their Christianity

regardless of how much sense it makes

Until all is fulfilled.....Jesus was talking about his crucifixion not the end of the world.....the ending of the world involves the mysteries of God being fulfilled, not his laws.

originally posted by: TAECOLE7
Until all is fulfilled.....Jesus was talking about his crucifixion not the end of the world.....the ending of the world involves the mysteries of God being fulfilled, not his laws.

There is no "mystery" unless you are listening to Paul.

a reply to: Is your statement true?

originally posted by: TAECOLE7
a reply to: Is your statement true?

Hey, stop being cryptic and just speak understandably.

a reply to: Matrixsurvivor

I apologize, my question was not a trick question, your statement about Paul, was that a true statement?