Valerie
Platinum Member
- Sep 17, 2008
- 31,521
- 7,392
- 1,170
Yesterday's Sermon
- Thread starter Care4all
- Start date
xsited1
Agent P
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
Fail! But I have a feeling you didn't put much stock in what that preacher (or priest) had to say.
I will agree with what he said about abortion. That's murder.
- Thread starter
- #23
I can not receive Communion in a Catholic Church....I am not part of their church family at the remembrance of the last supper, I can not take in, the body of Christ, in their parishes....
Immanuel
Gold Member
- May 15, 2007
- 16,828
- 2,270
- 183
In case you were seriously asking that question, it means that one is not allowed to participate in the Sacraments. It does not mean that one is not allowed to come to church, although why would someone attend who is being shunned? It is supposed to be used for the purpose of restoring a sinner to the Body of Christ rather than to drive one away.
Unfortunately, it tends to drive out the "sinner" rather than restoring him/her.
Immie
Valerie
Platinum Member
- Sep 17, 2008
- 31,521
- 7,392
- 1,170
- Thread starter
- #26
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
Fail! But I have a feeling you didn't put much stock in what that preacher (or priest) had to say.
I will agree with what he said about abortion. That's murder.
But do you cut a man's hand off for stealing now X? Do you pluck his eye out now? Do you kill adulterers? Do you follow the Law in the manner described in the old testament as the Muslims following Sharia law still do?
WHY make these exceptions? Can you answer that...?
Immanuel
Gold Member
- May 15, 2007
- 16,828
- 2,270
- 183
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
Have to disagree here... God's purpose was to show us that we need a savior.
Galatians 3:19-25 (emphasis added)
Immie
Ravi
Diamond Member
IMO denying anyone communion is worse than murder...at least from the viewpoint of Jesus.
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,928
- 0
- Banned
- #29
The Republican party doesn't support the death penalty across the board. I'm a Republican (so far) and I don't support it. My sister and her husband are Republicans and they do not support it...and she was a prosecutor for years.
She DID support it while she was still a registered Democrat, and before she was saved, however.
Did Bush support the death penalty? I can't remember if he did or not. He was governor of Texas, he probably did.
I don't recall McCain or Palin ever speaking out on the death penalty. I'd bet dollars to donuts that Palin doesn't support it.
And when you vote a candidate, you are not necessarily voting a party, unless that is the whole of the candidate's persona. Clinton went against his party many times, as did Bush. Quit thinking so generally and assuming that you're the only rounded person that exists. And do some research. There are Republicans who don't support the death penalty.
Immanuel
Gold Member
- May 15, 2007
- 16,828
- 2,270
- 183
I completely agree.
Here are some questions: what sin(s) did Jesus actually condemn? What sinner(s) did Jesus judge while here on Earth?
Immie
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,928
- 0
- Banned
- #31
Here's some interesting info, from an anti-death penalty site.
"The Democrats and the Death Penalty
by PAUL D'AMATO
DURING HIS 1992 election campaign, then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton stopped off in his home state to oversee the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, a man so brain-damaged that on the night of his execution he set aside his dessert to eat after he returned to his cell. This was a clear signal to all who were paying attention that Clinton was going prove his toughness on crime by showing his solid support for the death penalty. Stephen Bright, head of the Southern Center for Human Rights, put it this way:
Even the Arkansas Supreme Court said that Rector’s was a case that should be considered for executive clemency, but there was a more important agenda. The Democrats were taking back the crime issue. Bill Clinton, in the midst of the controversy regarding Gennifer Flowers, was showing that he was tough and that not only did he believe in the Death Penalty, but he actually carried it out. 1
Seven years later, political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal sits on Pennsylvania’s death row. Although Republican Governor Tom Ridge may sign Mumia’s death warrant, Mumia owes his murder conviction to a frameup orchestrated and defended by Philadelphia’s Democratic establishment. Democratic Mayor Ed Rendell, currently touted as a "rising star" in Democratic circles, helped orchestrate the police frame-up as the prosecutor in one of Mumia’s appeals."
International Socialist Review
"The Democrats and the Death Penalty
by PAUL D'AMATO
DURING HIS 1992 election campaign, then-Arkansas Governor Bill Clinton stopped off in his home state to oversee the execution of Ricky Ray Rector, a man so brain-damaged that on the night of his execution he set aside his dessert to eat after he returned to his cell. This was a clear signal to all who were paying attention that Clinton was going prove his toughness on crime by showing his solid support for the death penalty. Stephen Bright, head of the Southern Center for Human Rights, put it this way:
Even the Arkansas Supreme Court said that Rector’s was a case that should be considered for executive clemency, but there was a more important agenda. The Democrats were taking back the crime issue. Bill Clinton, in the midst of the controversy regarding Gennifer Flowers, was showing that he was tough and that not only did he believe in the Death Penalty, but he actually carried it out. 1
Seven years later, political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal sits on Pennsylvania’s death row. Although Republican Governor Tom Ridge may sign Mumia’s death warrant, Mumia owes his murder conviction to a frameup orchestrated and defended by Philadelphia’s Democratic establishment. Democratic Mayor Ed Rendell, currently touted as a "rising star" in Democratic circles, helped orchestrate the police frame-up as the prosecutor in one of Mumia’s appeals."
International Socialist Review
You have to show an ID or something to get communion?
AllieBaba
Rookie
- Oct 2, 2007
- 33,778
- 3,928
- 0
- Banned
- #33
And more:
"Clinton’s enthusiastic support for the death penalty is the crown jewel of the Democratic Party’s "get-tough-on-crime" laws, including life imprisonment for a third felony offense ("three strikes and you’re out"), immediate deportation of immigrants with years’ old criminal records and tougher sentencing for youth offenders. Clinton-sponsored legislation greatly expanded the number of federal crimes punishable by death and accelerated the number of executions at the state level. In the six years that Clinton has been president, more than 315 people have been executed in the United States. In the entire 12 years of the conservative Republican presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, 185 people were put to death. In the last two years alone, record numbers have been executed. In 1997, 74 people were executed–the largest number of executions in a single year since 1956. Sixty-eight death-row prisoners were killed in 1998.
Clearly, on the the issue of the death penalty, the Democratic Party’s record is no better–and in many ways–is much worse than the Republican Party’s record. This makes it all the more surprising that many opponents of the death penalty look to Democratic politicians as allies in the struggle to abolish capital punishment. In meetings to plan the National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty held in Chicago in November 1998, conference organizer Larry Marshall, an anti-death penalty lawyer who helped to free falsely accused Illinois death-row prisoner Rolando Cruz in 1996, proposed that Attorney General Janet Reno be invited as a keynote speaker. That a committed opponent of the death penalty would consider the official in charge of carrying out the federal death penalty suggests confusion at least."
"Clinton’s enthusiastic support for the death penalty is the crown jewel of the Democratic Party’s "get-tough-on-crime" laws, including life imprisonment for a third felony offense ("three strikes and you’re out"), immediate deportation of immigrants with years’ old criminal records and tougher sentencing for youth offenders. Clinton-sponsored legislation greatly expanded the number of federal crimes punishable by death and accelerated the number of executions at the state level. In the six years that Clinton has been president, more than 315 people have been executed in the United States. In the entire 12 years of the conservative Republican presidencies of Ronald Reagan and George Bush, 185 people were put to death. In the last two years alone, record numbers have been executed. In 1997, 74 people were executed–the largest number of executions in a single year since 1956. Sixty-eight death-row prisoners were killed in 1998.
Clearly, on the the issue of the death penalty, the Democratic Party’s record is no better–and in many ways–is much worse than the Republican Party’s record. This makes it all the more surprising that many opponents of the death penalty look to Democratic politicians as allies in the struggle to abolish capital punishment. In meetings to plan the National Conference on Wrongful Convictions and the Death Penalty held in Chicago in November 1998, conference organizer Larry Marshall, an anti-death penalty lawyer who helped to free falsely accused Illinois death-row prisoner Rolando Cruz in 1996, proposed that Attorney General Janet Reno be invited as a keynote speaker. That a committed opponent of the death penalty would consider the official in charge of carrying out the federal death penalty suggests confusion at least."
dilloduck
Diamond Member
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
If the Pharisees and Sadduce failed to understand Mosaic law , what WAS the law regarding above mentioned sins ? Where and who understood it and where is it accurately defined ?
- Thread starter
- #35
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
If the Pharisees and Sadduce failed to understand Mosaic law , what WAS the law regarding above mentioned sins ? Where and who understood it and where is it accurately defined ?
IN the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
I wonder why this guy didn't mention abortion.
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzbQzn9-_Xk[/ame]
or another from one of the more contemporary good guys.
"The Economic Bill of Rights"
"It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens."
Franklin D. Roosevelt - Excerpt from 11 January 1944 message to Congress on the State of the Union
source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzbQzn9-_Xk[/ame]
or another from one of the more contemporary good guys.
"The Economic Bill of Rights"
"It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens."
Franklin D. Roosevelt - Excerpt from 11 January 1944 message to Congress on the State of the Union
source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42
dilloduck
Diamond Member
uh, no.
yes mosaic law stands but you fail to understand mosaic law and its purpose as the Pharisees and Sadducee failed at understanding it. God's purpose was not to punish by killing another human being for killing. God's purpose was to rid society of the danger.
It's not like Moses had prisons on Mount sanai or in the dessert he roamed for 40 years to lock the bad lot, away.....You don't pluck a guys eye out or tooth out or cut his arm off if he stole something as mosaic law states .....do you? Why make exceptions for some of the Law in this manner, yet stick to killing another human who has killed?
This was the Sermon....I did not make this up myself!
If the Pharisees and Sadduce failed to understand Mosaic law , what WAS the law regarding above mentioned sins ? Where and who understood it and where is it accurately defined ?
IN the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Surely you don't mean that----God issued a law through Moses that no one understood until Jesus came along ? That trickster !
- Thread starter
- #39
ummmm, if they did understand it, and followed it correctly, there was no need for Jesus Christ.
Just off the top of my head and without any kind of research on this....In the book of Matthew Christ spoke of Divorce and the misunderstanding of the Jews regarding such, in the Sermon on the Mount-The Beatitudes Christ told them of how their interpretation of Judaic law was wrong, In the Parable of the Good Samaritan Christ showed them how they were wrong in their interpretation of the Law and in the Parable of the adulteress being stoned to death...let he who is without sin, cast the first stone he showed them how the law had been interpreted wrongly and with the Lord's prayer given to them Christ showed them....and the woman prostitute who washed Christ's feet with her hair and her tears Christ showed them that they were wrong in their interpretation of the Law, and with His death sentence for blaspheming God, he showed them as well....
Lonestar_logic
Republic of Texas
- May 13, 2009
- 24,539
- 2,233
- 205
No one said anything about "an eye for an eye", the Bible clearly states that man must submit himself to the governing authority. If said governing authority concludes that capital punishment is warranted then we must abide by that rule. This is found in the New Testament as I've shown with the Romans chapter 13 verses.
Similar threads
- Poll
New Topics
-
-
Pakistani man says Islamic fascist republic of Iran forced him into plot to kill Trump, media say- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 2
-
-
Father Awaiting Trial in Murder of Teen Daughter's Alleged Rapist Wins Primary for County Sheriff- Started by Mack The Finger
- Replies: 0
