No, he doesn't advocate drowning at all. That's not what that verse either says or implies.elman said:
Upvote
0
-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
What is He saying we should do with people who cause children to sin?Electric Sceptic said:
Upvote
0
He doesn't say anything about what should be done with them. He just says it will be bad for them - worse, in fact, than if they had been drowned. He doesn't advocate any course of action.elman said:
Upvote
0
He's saying nothing at all about what should be done to such people. How you get the idea that Christians should drown them is beyond me.elman said:
Upvote
0
How you get that Christians should do nothing about such people is also beyond me or that He is expressing no opinion.Electric Sceptic said:
Upvote
0
I get it from the fact that that's what he said.elman said:
If I say to you "Don't touch that...if you do, it'd be better off if you'd never been born!" am I saying anything beyond that you shouldn't touch that? Am I advocating some sort of action to be taken if you do touch that? No, I'm just saying that you shouldn't touch that.
Specifically, Jesus makes no direction that the people in question should be drowned or treated in any other way.
Upvote
0
Actually Jesus does not say it would have been better for him to not have been born, He says: "it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. "
It does not say what the alternative to being drowned would be that would be worse. It clearly expresses an opinion as to what needs to happen to these people. It is not a neutral statment in which Jesus does not express an opinion.
It does not say what the alternative to being drowned would be that would be worse. It clearly expresses an opinion as to what needs to happen to these people. It is not a neutral statment in which Jesus does not express an opinion.
Upvote
0
I know what Jesus says. I was using an example to show you where you are misunderstanding. You have apparently not understood the example, either. It's a common figure of speech - saying someone would be "better off dead!" or similar. It is not advocating that they should be killed.elman said:
Jesus does certainly express an opinion - that it would be better for these people if they had drowned. This is not advocating drowning them - he is merely saying whatever will happen to them will be worse than them being drowned. He says nothing at all about what should or will happen to them (except that what will happen to them will be worse than their being drowned). Jesus expresses no opinion as to what christians (or anyone else) should do to these people. Nor does he express an opinion as to what needs to happen to these people. He states - as fact - that whatever will happen to them will be worse than if they had drowned. Nowhere does he advocate any particular course to be taken by anyone.elman said:
Upvote
0
Electric Sceptic said:
So if He was not advocating a particular course of action, what was He advocating? Anything? Was He just pointlessly musing? Was He saying don't worry about this, God will take care of him? I don't think so.
Upvote
0
He was saying that people shouldn't harm children, because those who do so will suffer a bad fate. Just as he said many times, about many types of people, what kinds of fates they will have - read the Sermon on the Mount.elman said:
Once again, he was not advocating any course of action for people to take about people like this. That's basic English.
Upvote
0
Electric Sceptic said:
Basic English does not allow for you to interpret what He said as leave it to God. That comes from your preconceived desire for what He said to fit with what you want Him to have said.
Upvote
0
Basic English states that Jesus has not advocated any action whatsoever. He has said that what will happen to them (implying that he knows something in particular will happen to them) will be worse than a certain punishment. Nowhere does he advocate, suggest or imply an sort of action to be taken by anyone. He is talking about a fate that he knows they will suffer, and comparing it to something. That's all he's doing.elman said:
Upvote
0
He was saying it would be worse than if you drowned yourself with no hope of rescue. He was not advocating any kind of death.elman said:
Upvote
0
Blackmarch said:
What would be worse than being drowned? I see nothing about someone drownding themselves in this verse.
Upvote
0
"What would be worse than being drowned? I see nothing about someone drownding themselves in this verse."
Exactly.
Exactly.
Upvote
0
Sorry, causing a child to sin, or harming a child.
As for physical deaths, there are tortures that would be worse, but not many
As for physical deaths, there are tortures that would be worse, but not many
Upvote
0
Similar threads
