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.
It is what the bible says. Along with thisI agree with what the Bible says.
One cannot repent if one doesn't believe one has done wrong. So if a gay person says that she will not repent because there is nothing to repent, then it looks like you're saying the punishment stands.It is what the bible says. Along with this
Le 20:10 And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
Good thing for all of us we have a new covenant, whereby these are forgiven in repentance.
Hard to tell if you can't even point it out.Don't play games. It was quoted in a discussion about gays and it was specifically directed at gays. You've already agreed as to what you meant by it and you have said that you agree with it. Now suggesting that it was done for some other reason is farcical.
What sounds loving is when the One who does the judging (God) actually pays the price for the wrong that the person deserved to die for, with the only condition being that the offender admits his wrong and repents of it. However, if the person who did the wrong doesn't believe he did anything wrong, and therefore continues doing the wrong, and is in fact proud of what he is doing, then what choice does the One doing the judging (God) have other than to give him the price of his wrong?One cannot repent if one doesn't believe one has done wrong. So if a gay person says that she will not repent because there is nothing to repent, then it looks like you're saying the punishment stands.
Maybe what you should be saying is 'Repent. Or you deserve to die'. Does that sound more loving to you? More caring?
Nope you cannot repent if you do not believe it. And yes, God will carry out the penalty and judgement in the resurrection from the dead. Those of us who are of faith will have eternal life and never die, not so for the rest. We say repent, so you also may have eternal life, in the resurrection, and dwell in the eternal kingdom. So you see, we teach no such carrying out of death in this world and this life. So, what you are doing is calling us killers, or God, for not giving them eternal life in the next world in the resurrection from the dead. Silly really, because you believe none of it anyway. How rediculous to hate God for not including them in the promise of heaven. You don't even believe in heaven.One cannot repent if one doesn't believe one has done wrong. So if a gay person says that she will not repent because there is nothing to repent, then it looks like you're saying the punishment stands.
Maybe what you should be saying is 'Repent. Or you deserve to die'. Does that sound more loving to you? More caring?
Which you agree, in the specific case of gay people, is death. Why are you asking me? This has already been decided.However, if the person who did the wrong doesn't believe he did anything wrong, and therefore continues doing the wrong, and is in fact proud of what he is doing, then what choice does the One doing the judging (God) have other than to give him the price of his wrong?
You do know that people are following this discussion? And do know what you have posted? Which were very specific answers to specific questions.Hard to tell if you can't even point it out.
Yes, it would be nonsensical in extremis for me to hate God. How right you are are. I cannot argue against what He says because I don't think He has said anything. I hope that's clear to you. But I can argue against what people say they believe He wants.Silly really, because you believe none of it anyway. How rediculous to hate God for not including them in the promise of heaven. You don't even believe in heaven.
Since you keep writing about it, and won't let it go (see post #272), I thought you'd want to offer your input.Which you agree, in the specific case of gay people, is death. Why are you asking me? This has already been decided.
No, you cannot because you are judging what you do not understand. What he want's and I want, and every Christian wants is for people, all people to have something more than this life. In order for you judge us JUSTLY, you have to have Fuller knowledge than just the piecemeal your judgements are based upon. This life is one thing, nobody wants to take that from them. In fact to quote scripture, "EAT, DRINK, AND BE MERRY!"Yes, it would be nonsensical in extremis for me to hate God. How right you are are. I cannot argue against what He says because I don't think He has said anything. I hope that's clear to you. But I can argue against what people say they believe He wants.
I would like to think that that's equally as clear to you. But it seems not.
From what twisted source did you find that?No, you cannot because you are judging what you do not understand. What he want's and I want, and every Christian wants is for people, all people to have something more than this life. In order for you judge us JUSTLY, you have to have Fuller knowledge than just the piecemeal your judgements are based upon. This life is one thing, nobody wants to take that from them. In fact to quote scripture, "EAT, DRINK, AND BE MERRY!"
Since this life, and this world is all you have to enjoy, so make the best of it.
There was only one nation on this earth, given the authority to carry out God's judgement UPON IT'S OWN CITIZENS. That was Israel. Yep, they also Judged "CERTAIN OTHER NATIONS".
*****It was not for their righteousness that they Judged the nations.....
It was the wickedness of those nations.
De 9:4 Speak not thou in thine heart, after that the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, For my righteousness the LORD hath brought me in to possess this land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD doth drive them out from before thee.
De 9:5 Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
2. things there
God did not destroy nations for not killing SINNERS, or simply for being sinners.
It was for their wickedness.
Do you know what their wickedness was?
Le 18:21 And thou shalt not let any of thy seed pass through the fire to Molech, neither shalt thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD.
What was this about?
They had hollow images of their God, which the hollow was filled with wood and lit on fire, until it glowed red hot. It's arms stuck out before it, glowing red hot. They placed their children in its arms, until it burnt to death. Their priests would beat their drums as loud as possible to drown out their children's cries as they died, through basically frying in the arms of "moloch".
Yes, God killed these nations and Israel took their land.
Got a problem with that?
Handing over one's child to pagan priests was the big no-no.FWIW:
Most of the Jewish interpreters, Jarchi (on Le 17:16), Kimchi, and Maimonides (Mor. Neb. 3:38) among the number, say that in the worship of Molech the children were not burned, but made to pass between two burning pyres, as a purificatory rite. But the allusions to the actual slaughter are too plain to be mistaken, and Aben Ezra, in his note on Le 18:21, says that "to cause to pass through" is the same as "to burn." "They sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, and shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan" (Ps 106:37-38). In Jer 7:31, the reference to the worship of Molech by human sacrifice is still more distinct: "They have built the high places of Tophet... to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire," as "burnt-offerings unto Baal," the sun-god of Tyre, with whom, or in whose character, Molech was worshipped (Jer 19:5). Compare the statements in De 12:31; Eze 16:20-21; Eze 23:37; the last two of which may also be adduced to show that the victims were slaughtered before they were burned. But the most remarkable passage is that in 2Ch 28:3, in which the wickedness of Ahaz is described: "Moreover, he burned incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, and burned (וִיִּבעֵר) his children in the fire, after the abominations of the nations whom Jehovah had driven out before the children of Israel." Now, in the parallel narrative of 2Ki 16:3, instead of וִיִּבעֵר, "and he burned," the reading is הֶעֵַביר, "he made to pass through," and Dr. Geiger suggests that the former may be the true reading, of which the latter is an easy modification, serving as a euphemistic expression to disguise the horrible nature of the sacrificial rites. But it is more natural to suppose that it is an exceptional instance, and that the true reading is וִיִּעֲבֵר than to assume that the other passages have been intentionally altered. We may infer from the expression, "after the abominations of the nations whom Jehovah had driven out before the children of Israel," that the character of the Molech-worship of the time of Ahaz was essentially the same. as that of the old Canaanites, although Movers maintains the contrary.Molech from the McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia.
Molech from the McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia.www.biblicalcyclopedia.com
Any alterations? The Hebrews engaged in Whatever it was as well,,so???????FWIW:
Most of the Jewish interpreters, Jarchi (on Le 17:16), Kimchi, and Maimonides (Mor. Neb. 3:38) among the number, say that in the worship of Molech the children were not burned, but made to pass between two burning pyres, as a purificatory rite. But the allusions to the actual slaughter are too plain to be mistaken, and Aben Ezra, in his note on Le 18:21, says that "to cause to pass through" is the same as "to burn." "They sacrificed their sons and their daughters unto devils, and shed innocent blood, the blood of their sons and of their daughters, whom they sacrificed unto the idols of Canaan" (Ps 106:37-38). In Jer 7:31, the reference to the worship of Molech by human sacrifice is still more distinct: "They have built the high places of Tophet... to burn their sons and their daughters in the fire," as "burnt-offerings unto Baal," the sun-god of Tyre, with whom, or in whose character, Molech was worshipped (Jer 19:5). Compare the statements in De 12:31; Eze 16:20-21; Eze 23:37; the last two of which may also be adduced to show that the victims were slaughtered before they were burned. But the most remarkable passage is that in 2Ch 28:3, in which the wickedness of Ahaz is described: "Moreover, he burned incense in the valley of the son of Hinnom, and burned (וִיִּבעֵר) his children in the fire, after the abominations of the nations whom Jehovah had driven out before the children of Israel." Now, in the parallel narrative of 2Ki 16:3, instead of וִיִּבעֵר, "and he burned," the reading is הֶעֵַביר, "he made to pass through," and Dr. Geiger suggests that the former may be the true reading, of which the latter is an easy modification, serving as a euphemistic expression to disguise the horrible nature of the sacrificial rites. But it is more natural to suppose that it is an exceptional instance, and that the true reading is וִיִּעֲבֵר than to assume that the other passages have been intentionally altered. We may infer from the expression, "after the abominations of the nations whom Jehovah had driven out before the children of Israel," that the character of the Molech-worship of the time of Ahaz was essentially the same. as that of the old Canaanites, although Movers maintains the contrary.Molech from the McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia.
Molech from the McClintock and Strong Biblical Cyclopedia.www.biblicalcyclopedia.com
I'll take your 272 and raise you my 282. If you follow the conversation then you would have seen that I've already given it.Since you keep writing about it, and won't let it go (see post #272), I thought you'd want to offer your input.
Ah, so you can accuse others of things that are untrue. how one feels, rather than what is real.I wouldn't know. I've told you, I don't read arguments based on scripture.
But, yet again, it was specifically used in a conversation about gay people, specifically directed at gay people. That is not up for discussion. It is plainly there to be seen. And the person quoting it was asked if he really believed that the quote was applicable - that gay people deserved death. The answer was an unequivocal yes.In the OT, homosexuals were to be put to death, I assume, because God did not want this abomination to exist among His chosen people.
In NT theology, all unrepentant sinners are "deserving of death" as Paul indicates. As I pointed out to you, the passage in Romans is far broader than just homosexuality, as are other passages where Paul refers to sexual immorality along with other sins.
No. I can't accuse people of things that are untrue. How is that even possible? What point can you possibly be trying to make?Ah, so you can accuse others of things that are untrue. how one feels, rather than what is real.
I think if you read Philo, it is something progressive, escalating to other behaviors.. using violently so. The idea It brought to my mind when reading him, was a cancer that can spread, and metastasize. Which could would be the desires of the flesh run amuk. So sin, desires of the flesh left unchecked, ruin a society.In the OT, homosexuals were to be put to death, I assume, because God did not want this abomination to exist among His chosen people.
In NT theology, all unrepentant sinners are "deserving of death" as Paul indicates. As I pointed out to you, the passage in Romans is far broader than just homosexuality, as are other passages where Paul refers to sexual immorality along with other sins.
Yes, if any sinner refuses to acknowledge his or her sin and repent, he or she will experience the wrath and condemnation of God. There is nothing unique about an unrepentant homosexual vis-a-vis an unrepentant adulterer or shoplifter.
Jesus' treatment of the woman taken in adultery - which could just as easily have been the homosexual taken in sodomy - makes clear that the harsh OT penalties no longer apply.
It's not clear to me why you keep beating the dead horse of the Levitical punishment.
Certainly, the Christian message is always "Repent of your sin and seek forgiveness in Christ or you will experience the wrath and condemnation of God." From the Christian perspective, this is indeed a loving and caring message.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?