Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448 
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 19, 2016 22:20:50 GMT -5
One of the common claims of the anti-Christian left is the belief that Christians are obligated by scriptural law to administer the death penalty for the capital crimes in the Old Testament, and that Christians not doing so must necessarily be ignoring or disobeying scripture. For example, in a recent P/CE debate, a particular poster cites Deuteronomy 13:6-7, which reads in the AKJV: If your brother, the son of your mother, or your son, or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your friend, which is as your own soul, entice you secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which you have not known, you, nor your fathers; Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, near to you, or far off from you, from the one end of the earth even to the other end of the earth; You shall not consent to him, nor listen to him; neither shall your eye pity him, neither shall you spare, neither shall you conceal him: But you shall surely kill him; your hand shall be first on him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. And you shall stone him with stones, that he die; because he has sought to thrust you away from the LORD your God, which brought you out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage. This law is found among the Law of Moses in the Jewish Torah today and is commonly considered "Jewish" although it was in fact handed down to all twelve tribes of Israel (one of which was the tribe of Judah, from whom the Jews descend). Any reasonable discussion of the Law of Moses starts with a detailed study of who the Israelites were, their history, their purpose, what God had done for them (and continued to do for them), the covenants they had sworn to uphold, the nature of the peoples around them, and, of course, historical context, none of which critics typically know or care to know. Hence rather than examine the purpose and nature of the law, to keep this post to a reasonable length, I'll identify some specific questions pertaining specifically to the claim in the first paragraph: - To whom did the Law of Moses apply and to whom did it not apply?
- Which laws of the Old Covenant (God's covenant with Israel on Mt. Sinai) are in effect today? Is the Old Covenant in effect today, and for whom?
- Were substitute penalties and ransoms available for capital crimes in ancient Israel? Were they frequently invoked?
- How did law and punishment work in Israelite society? What was the justice system like?
- How does New Covenant law (the Law as fulfilled by Christ Jesus) modify and supplement the Law of the Old Covenant? What additional strictures are placed on Christians that were not placed on the Israelites?
- Are Christians under the death penalty today for sin today? Who administers this penalty?
I can devote a summary post to each of these questions and am willing to do so over the coming days to shed as much light as I can on the issue, but only if at least one poster expresses an interest in hearing the answers with a promise to read what I write, take the material seriously, and, if need be, raise any questions with strictly academic tone and tenor. This is because i) the answers to all of the above questions are readily available to anyone seeking them, ii) it may take me an hour or more to compose each of the summary posts, and iii) I have no intention of investing such a large amount of time unless I can hope to fill a need and sate a genuine desire to know. In any case, the offer is out there to all posters excluding the two with whom I've made private agreements. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 24, 2024 10:43:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 0:07:40 GMT -5
And Jesus said:
In other words... the laws of Moses still apply. Christians can say that they don't... but that's them picking and choosing what they want to believe. It's NOT them following scripture.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 20, 2016 0:37:36 GMT -5
And Jesus said: In other words... the laws of Moses still apply. Christians can say that they don't... but that's them picking and choosing what they want to believe. It's NOT them following scripture. A scripture I've quoted many times.  You're partly correct and partly incorrect. Where you're correct is that Christians are by no means exempt from the law. That's actually the answer to one of the questions above. All of the sins of the Old Testament are still sins today, and the penalties are the same. Furthermore, the New Covenant was established and the law was fulfilled--meaning filled to the fullest, completed. A part of this fulfillment was the institution of the New Testament Church. Israel Broke the Old Covenant and it was replaced (renewed) by a new, more perfect (i.e. stricter) covenant, which was also extended to the Gentiles. This is precisely why Christians today are still expected to keep the law of the Old Testament, save for the ceremonial laws, which were symbolic and replaced by new symbols at Christ's coming. The Laws we're talking about here--specifically, about not following after other gods, or enticing others to do so--are very much still in effect. (Having said this, we have to pay special consideration to whom the laws and punishments apply, which is a very detailed scriptural topic.) Where your statement needs to be qualified is in the matter of who is to enact the punishment. This aspect changed in the fulfillment. That is, the laws themselves still apply, but with their fulfillment and with the end of the Levitical priesthood and old ceremonial laws, a new government, new Church, and stricter guidelines for the conduct of Christians were introduced. For example, the Church is to put out members unrepentantly practicing sin. There were also additional, stricter versions of existing laws added (for example, prohibitions on hate, etc.) There are literally hundreds of scriptures to work through in establishing this point, but that's a very rough summary. Hence you're correct to say that Christians can't pick and choose which laws they want to follow, but at the same time Christians can't ignore the fulfillment of the law and all of Christ's instructions in the New Testament which complete that law. It's what living by faith is all about. Many of the protestant churches twist "living by faith" into a doctrine that the law has been done away with, and the very scriptures you've posted (along with others) prove that this absolutely isn't the case. |
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,351
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Jun 20, 2016 3:21:37 GMT -5
Virgil, you lose me in your first sentence - "One of the common claims of the anti-Christian left "
The left generally is not anti-Christian. They are however anti-hypocrisy. Your church's interpretation of scripture may or may not be "right". I did bible study too, in my birth Lutheran denomination. The founding pastor of that church who baptized me went on to be a noted theologian. My Dad is a lay minister and there are ministers in my extended family as well.
My current preferred church, non-denominational, looks at the bible in many ways including metaphorical and metaphysical. You and your church permanently lost me when you were OK with the scriptural practice of marrying off the raped to the rapist. What does your church say about the current icky guy in the news? The one who has 12 females 18 and under as hostage. The one who apparently had two children by the eldest, 18, who are now 3 yrs. old and 6 mos. old. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 24, 2024 10:43:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 3:41:41 GMT -5
And Jesus said: In other words... the laws of Moses still apply. Christians can say that they don't... but that's them picking and choosing what they want to believe. It's NOT them following scripture. A scripture I've quoted many times. You're partly correct and partly incorrect. Where you're correct is that Christians are by no means exempt from the law. That's actually the answer to one of the questions above. All of the sins of the Old Testament are still sins today, and the penalties are the same. Furthermore, the New Covenant was established and the law was fulfilled--meaning filled to the fullest, completed. A part of this fulfillment was the institution of the New Testament Church. Israel Broke the Old Covenant and it was replaced (renewed) by a new, more perfect (i.e. stricter) covenant, which was also extended to the Gentiles. This is precisely why Christians today are still expected to keep the law of the Old Testament, save for the ceremonial laws, which were symbolic and replaced by new symbols at Christ's coming. The Laws we're talking about here--specifically, about not following after other gods, or enticing others to do so--are very much still in effect. (Having said this, we have to pay special consideration to whom the laws and punishments apply, which is a very detailed scriptural topic.) Where your statement needs to be qualified is in the matter of who is to enact the punishment. This aspect changed in the fulfillment. That is, the laws themselves still apply, but with their fulfillment and with the end of the Levitical priesthood and old ceremonial laws, a new government, new Church, and stricter guidelines for the conduct of Christians were introduced. For example, the Church is to put out members unrepentantly practicing sin. There were also additional, stricter versions of existing laws added (for example, prohibitions on hate, etc.) There are literally hundreds of scriptures to work through in establishing this point, but that's a very rough summary. Hence you're correct to say that Christians can't pick and choose which laws they want to follow, but at the same time Christians can't ignore the fulfillment of the law and all of Christ's instructions in the New Testament which complete that law. It's what living by faith is all about. Many of the protestant churches twist "living by faith" into a doctrine that the law has been done away with, and the very scriptures you've posted (along with others) prove that this absolutely isn't the case. And the part that you wish to ignore is that the law requires stoning for many offenses against God's commandments (two of which are following any other God(s) and homosexuality). I'm not suggesting that anyone is to "judge" anyone. That's (supposedly) God's job. However, the punishment for many things God doesn't like is death. That death to be given by his followers. Anything other than that is picking and choosing what you want to follow and what you don't. Jesus' "fulfillment" of the law is that no more sacrifices are necessary. Now "he is the way". Show me the passage whereby he says (anything remotely resembling) "There is no more need to punish those that break my Father's laws"... and I'll concede the point. The closest to that would be the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone" (John 8:7) one... except for two small problems: - That one is in doubt as to whether it is actually something that (supposedly) really happened or instead it's a later inserted forgery (here's a good, but long, link about that: Concerning the Story of the Adulteress in the Eighth Chapter of John)... I'd go with "forgery" since it sounds good, but doesn't track with Jesus' support of Mosaic Law in Matthew.
- Even if it wasn't in doubt, it doesn't say "do not punish her, for punishments no longer exist for violations of my Father's Law"... it says find someone who is sinless to cast the first stone. That's easily accomplished by letting a small child do so (thus teaching small children that being bad means punishment). It doesn't say "let ONLY the sinless cast ALL the stones", it's just worried about the first one.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 20, 2016 10:07:13 GMT -5
Virgil, you lose me in your first sentence - "One of the common claims of the anti-Christian left "
The left generally is not anti-Christian. They are however anti-hypocrisy. Your church's interpretation of scripture may or may not be "right". I did bible study too, in my birth Lutheran denomination. The founding pastor of that church who baptized me went on to be a noted theologian. My Dad is a lay minister and there are ministers in my extended family as well.
My current preferred church, non-denominational, looks at the bible in many ways including metaphorical and metaphysical. You and your church permanently lost me when you were OK with the scriptural practice of marrying off the raped to the rapist. What does your church say about the current icky guy in the news? The one who has 12 females 18 and under as hostage. The one who apparently had two children by the eldest, 18, who are now 3 yrs. old and 6 mos. old. I'm talking about the anti-Christian contingent among leftists. It wasn't my intention to label the entire political left as anti-Christian. There is an anti-Christian right as well, but they have different qualms. As for the statutes on rape in the Levitical law, I addressed the topic in detail a few years ago on this board. You should be able to find the thread by searching. It's not on-topic for this thread. And the part that you wish to ignore is that the law requires stoning for many offenses against God's commandments (two of which are following any other God(s) and homosexuality). I'm not suggesting that anyone is to "judge" anyone. That's (supposedly) God's job. However, the punishment for many things God doesn't like is death. That death to be given by his followers. Define "followers". There is no generic "follower" in the Bible. There are specific groups of people who covenanted with God at various times, and who enter into a covenant with Him today at baptism. The twelve tribes of Israel--the so-called "Church in the Wilderness"--was one such group. They were subject to a particular covenant. The laws and statutes in that covenant were very worldly, very practical. They were representative of greater laws, the Great Spiritual Law, some of which were known before the coming of Jesus Christ, and some that were only revealed at his coming. The keeping of the law for a Christian is in keeping the Great Spiritual Law, which in some cases amended the ways in which the laws were to be kept. One example of such a change was how the New Testament Church was to treat enemies, including the enemies of God. These laws were added in the fulfillment. Christians were to love enemies, forgive transgressions, and endure persecution. These strictures were not present in the Old Covenant, because the full law hadn't been given at that time. Paul's letter to the Romans or the book of Hebrews both speak a great deal about this. The apostle Paul was formerly of the sect of the Pharisees and mercilessly persecuted the early Church until he was confronted by Christ and shown the truth. You can read about this in the early chapters of Acts. Anything other than that is picking and choosing what you want to follow and what you don't. Absolutely not. It's a defensible, holistic reading of scripture. Christians are subject to the New Covenant, which is separate from the Old Covenant between God and the Israelites at Mt. Sinai. The Old Covenant was broken by the Israelites and the tribes scattered. Christ, who is the God of the Old Testament, instituted the New Covenant at his coming. The laws of the new covenant are the same as for the Old Covenant--supplemented, as I said--but with administrative, institutional, and ceremonial differences that are made very plain throughout the New Testament. Again, this reflects the fact that the law Christians are to keep is the Great Spiritual Law, which was the foundation on which the Old Covenant was laid. All the acts and attitudes that were condemned in the Old Testament and that were judged in the Old Testament are also condemned and judged for Christians (those who have been called by God and entered into the New Covenant with Him at baptism) today. For example, the penalty for adultery, homosexuality, blasphemy is still death. In this case, spiritual death--loss of the opportunity to be in the Kingdom of God and subsequent destruction in Hellfire. Christians cannot practice these things. In fact, the New Testament makes it clear that knowingly practicing any kind of sin (with "practice" meaning the routine, unrepentant commission of sin without any desire to stop or change) is subject to this death penalty, since it blasphemes the Holy Spirit and constitutes what is called the "unforgivable sin". Show me the passage whereby he says (anything remotely resembling) "There is no more need to punish those that break my Father's laws"... and I'll concede the point. Let's leave a discussion of the hermeneutics of John 8 for another thread. Christ would never say anything of this nature because it's not true. Christians are still under the death penalty. Moreover, there were punishments for those who practiced sin in the Church. The entire book of Acts, all of Paul's letters to the Gentile Churches is replete with examples of how the New Testament Church dealt with apostasy, adultery, false teachers, liars, and all manner of people besides. The main purpose of the letters in scripture is to show Christians how the Church and its members ought to conduct themselves. Paul's letter to Timothy lays out Church government quite clearly. The letter to the Hebrews and the writings of James and John address issues of where converted Jews were trying to bring in elements of the Old Covenant (circumcision, salvation by works, ceremonial laws, etc.) that were superseded by the New Testament and rendered null thereby. Christians that practiced sin were cast out of the Church. You can read about the case of the man sleeping with his mother in 1 Corinthians 5 and Paul's exhortation to the Church, as a prominent example. A blasphemer that refused to desist in acts of blasphemy would be similarly thrown out of the Church. If he later repented (as in: ceased to practice the sin), he could be welcomed back into the fold, but otherwise he was to be shunned and completely cut out. That same man would face judgment from God in the Day of Judgment. God knows the heart and He is just; the ultimate judgment is His. A Church that refused to cast out evil was cut off from Christ and would no longer be his church. God has no tolerance for sin whatsoever. In any case, if you're genuinely interested, the Book of Hebrews is a good place to start when examining the issue of the Great Spiritual Law and the New Covenant. I won't say it's a "confusing" topic, because it's very clear when the entirety of the Bible is put together, but I will say that it's an issue that confuses most Christians. That and the issue of justification, but that's a discussion for another thread. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 24, 2024 10:43:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 18:25:03 GMT -5
The Bible itself is already clear enough for me, Virgil Showlion. It says "stone" (and other manners of taking life) so it advocates death. It says to do that punishment for those specific "evil" or "against God's will" acts that it says do them for. It's pretty straight forward on this and only someone that wants to follow what they like and ignore what they don't would say otherwise. Simple questions with a simple answers: - Does it say those deadly punishments for those sinful transgressions... yes or no?
- Does it further go on to say that Jesus himself said "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law"... yes or no?
No long winded "well except many believe... yadda yadda yadda...." going on for paragraph after paragraph... just a simple "yes" or "no" for each.
1. ____
2. ____ |
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jun 20, 2016 20:08:44 GMT -5
The Bible itself is already clear enough for me, Virgil Showlion . It says "stone" (and other manners of taking life) so it advocates death. It says to do that punishment for those specific "evil" or "against God's will" acts that it says do them for. It's pretty straight forward on this and only someone that wants to follow what they like and ignore what they don't would say otherwise. Simple questions with a simple answers: - Does it say those deadly punishments for those sinful transgressions... yes or no?
- Does it further go on to say that Jesus himself said "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law"... yes or no?
No long winded "well except many believe... yadda yadda yadda...." going on for paragraph after paragraph... just a simple "yes" or "no" for each.
1. ____
2. ____ 1. Yes. 2. No. (Christ says "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." He says "For 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." You can't omit and ignore the most important part of these verses.) If you're going to throw out meaning, context, scope, and literally hundreds of scriptures to rest your argument on just one and a half verses... beam me up. The Bible is meant to be interpreted as a holistic doctrine. It gives us examples, exhortations, reasoning, the tools we need to see the big picture. All that stuff you summarize as "yadda yadda yadda". |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 24, 2024 10:43:01 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2016 21:04:19 GMT -5
The Bible itself is already clear enough for me, Virgil Showlion . It says "stone" (and other manners of taking life) so it advocates death. It says to do that punishment for those specific "evil" or "against God's will" acts that it says do them for. It's pretty straight forward on this and only someone that wants to follow what they like and ignore what they don't would say otherwise. Simple questions with a simple answers: - Does it say those deadly punishments for those sinful transgressions... yes or no?
- Does it further go on to say that Jesus himself said "Do not think that I came to abolish the Law"... yes or no?
No long winded "well except many believe... yadda yadda yadda...." going on for paragraph after paragraph... just a simple "yes" or "no" for each. 1. Yes. 2. No. You'd better check your Bible again... (the answer to #2 was "yes") ETA: since I asked for a simple "yes or no"... I ignored everything after your: 1. Yes. 2. No. |
|
