I acted purely in the name of my religion
-
legalAlien wrote: a cell with a tv You think a cell with a TV is a luxury? :omg: It's not what they give you that is the punishment, it's taking away your freedom and independance. A TV will help pass the time but it wont make it any easier.
Ðavid Wulff Audioscrobbler :: flickr Die Freiheit spielt auf allen Geigen (QT)
David Wulff wrote: legalAlien wrote: a cell with a tv You think a cell with a TV is a luxury? They should be forced to watch soap operas and hard-core teleshopping programmes all day... now that would be punishment! :P David
-
I never saw the movie, but when people start linking social issues like women abuse with religion there will always be a nut case who will show an extreme response. Couple of interesting things to note about Islam It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. The Quran specifically says that “if someone says something you deem objectionable about the God or Prophet Muhammad, ignore them”
Anonymous wrote: It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. Gee, maybe you ought to go explain that to all the Islamic nations on the planet where women can't get an education or drive a car, and are forced to wear bags over their heads and are summarily stoned to death when accused of adultry. Anonymous wrote: The Quran specifically says that “if someone says something you deem objectionable about the God or Prophet Muhammad, ignore them” Again, you seem to be preaching to the wrong crowd. What don't you muster the courage to go give that sermon in the Middle East somewhere - they seem to need it a lot more.
-
I never saw the movie, but when people start linking social issues like women abuse with religion there will always be a nut case who will show an extreme response. Couple of interesting things to note about Islam It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. The Quran specifically says that “if someone says something you deem objectionable about the God or Prophet Muhammad, ignore them”
Anonymous wrote: It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. It is a blind and ignorant statement. In Christianity women have equal rights and high social stature. You need to read the bible to get the point. Many things that Muslims claim to be only in Islam are already in Bible. It is the Mary/idol/saint worshiping ways of Catholics, greedy evangelists and Bush like Christians that prefer living under old testament Laws to living in Christ that gives Christanity a bad name. Forcing the women to wear veils and male domination in islamic societies is not exactly what is known as "equal rights" and "social stature".
-
Anonymous wrote: It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. It is a blind and ignorant statement. In Christianity women have equal rights and high social stature. You need to read the bible to get the point. Many things that Muslims claim to be only in Islam are already in Bible. It is the Mary/idol/saint worshiping ways of Catholics, greedy evangelists and Bush like Christians that prefer living under old testament Laws to living in Christ that gives Christanity a bad name. Forcing the women to wear veils and male domination in islamic societies is not exactly what is known as "equal rights" and "social stature".
-
There is no death penalty in the EU, it is illegal according to the European Convention on Human Rights. And frankly, death penalty would be too quick and easy. A life behind bars seems a harsher punishment for me.
- Not a substitute for human interaction -
K(arl) wrote: And frankly, death penalty would be too quick and easy. A life behind bars seems a harsher punishment for me. 1. Death is the only way to guarantee that a criminal won't commit additional crimes. 2. I can't imagine what it's like to know that your days are numbered. On the other hand, knowing that you'll be behind bars for the rest of your life doesn't sound much better, but at least you can dream of one day getting the chance to escape. Regards, Alvaro
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. -- GWB, 1999.
-
-
Jason Henderson wrote: Bush like Christians come on If you support death penalty and still think you are a good Christian, you need to read Galatians 5:2-6.
I'm reading it, but I don't see anything about the death penalty. Please explain.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blog -
K(arl) wrote: And frankly, death penalty would be too quick and easy. A life behind bars seems a harsher punishment for me. 1. Death is the only way to guarantee that a criminal won't commit additional crimes. 2. I can't imagine what it's like to know that your days are numbered. On the other hand, knowing that you'll be behind bars for the rest of your life doesn't sound much better, but at least you can dream of one day getting the chance to escape. Regards, Alvaro
Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is. -- GWB, 1999.
- and for innocents, what does Death Penalty achieve? 2) Bad news, our days are numbered :rolleyes:
Fold with us!
There are two things that one must get used to or one will find life unendurable: the damages of time and injustices of men - Nicolas de Chamfort (1741 - 1794) -
I never saw the movie, but when people start linking social issues like women abuse with religion there will always be a nut case who will show an extreme response. Couple of interesting things to note about Islam It is the only religion where women have given equal rights and a higher social stature. The Quran specifically says that “if someone says something you deem objectionable about the God or Prophet Muhammad, ignore them”
Given that Van Gogh was most likely an agnostic or atheist like myself, I'd have to say that the killer was doing what his religion told him. Read up on what the Koran says about people who are not "believers in the book": "Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them and seize them, confine them, and lie in wait for them in every place of ambush" (Surah 9:5) "Those who follow Muhammad are merciless for the unbelievers but kind to each other." (Qur'an 48:29) "Enmity and hatred will reign between us until ye believe in Allah alone." (Qur'an 60:4) "Fight the unbelievers in your surroundings, and let them find harshness in you." (Qur'an 9:123)
-
I'm reading it, but I don't see anything about the death penalty. Please explain.
"Live long and prosper." - Spock
Jason Henderson
blogJason Henderson wrote: I'm reading it, but I don't see anything about the death penalty. Please explain. According Paul, Christians need to subject to the Governing authorities (Romans 13:1-5) like Jesus and the Apostles did. Yet a Christian has two mutually exclusive choices when it comes to Biblical laws: Either to live by the laws of Old Testament, punishsments for which include death penalty, stoning etc. or to live in Christ. It also means that while obeying the laws of the land, a Christian should not take active part in judging others (Romans 2:1-4)under the mosaic law or carrying out the sentences under Mosaic laws (including death penalty). Tell me, if you believe that death penalty is justified under Romans 13:1-5, what is wrong with stoning for adultery?
-
Jason Henderson wrote: I'm reading it, but I don't see anything about the death penalty. Please explain. According Paul, Christians need to subject to the Governing authorities (Romans 13:1-5) like Jesus and the Apostles did. Yet a Christian has two mutually exclusive choices when it comes to Biblical laws: Either to live by the laws of Old Testament, punishsments for which include death penalty, stoning etc. or to live in Christ. It also means that while obeying the laws of the land, a Christian should not take active part in judging others (Romans 2:1-4)under the mosaic law or carrying out the sentences under Mosaic laws (including death penalty). Tell me, if you believe that death penalty is justified under Romans 13:1-5, what is wrong with stoning for adultery?
Anonymous wrote: Yet a Christian has two mutually exclusive choices when it comes to Biblical laws: Either to live by the laws of Old Testament, punishsments for which include death penalty, stoning etc. or to live in Christ. We don't live under Biblical laws, we live under secular laws made by secular authorities which have been established by God. If these laws call for the death penalty then we need to abide by them unless they stand in the way of us obeying God (Acts 4). Anonymous wrote: It also means that while obeying the laws of the land, a Christian should not take active part in judging others (Romans 2:1-4)under the mosaic law or carrying out the sentences under Mosaic laws (including death penalty). I don't think Paul is talking about judging those who commit crimes in Romans 2. He's talking about judging sinners when we ourselves do the same things. We're hipocrites if we try to say someone should be condemned for sinning while we do the same things. Point out the sin to your brother but do so in love and with respect and not condemnation. Anonymous wrote: Tell me, if you believe that death penalty is justified under Romans 13:1-5, what is wrong with stoning for adultery? Why wouldn't it be? We are told to submit to the authorities and if they say there is a death penalty (FOR A CRIME) then we should submit just the same. If we do what is right, we have nothing to fear. Even if we are unjustly accused we need to submit. 1 Peter 2:1-21 For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, Phillip, and many many others were submissive unto death. They were executed by the authorities, but I don't believe I ever heard about them protesting the death penalty. Jesus stopped a stoning, but he did not order an end to the practice. He calls on his followers to show mercy, not the secular authorities. That's how I see it anyway.
"Live long and prosper." -
-
Anonymous wrote: Yet a Christian has two mutually exclusive choices when it comes to Biblical laws: Either to live by the laws of Old Testament, punishsments for which include death penalty, stoning etc. or to live in Christ. We don't live under Biblical laws, we live under secular laws made by secular authorities which have been established by God. If these laws call for the death penalty then we need to abide by them unless they stand in the way of us obeying God (Acts 4). Anonymous wrote: It also means that while obeying the laws of the land, a Christian should not take active part in judging others (Romans 2:1-4)under the mosaic law or carrying out the sentences under Mosaic laws (including death penalty). I don't think Paul is talking about judging those who commit crimes in Romans 2. He's talking about judging sinners when we ourselves do the same things. We're hipocrites if we try to say someone should be condemned for sinning while we do the same things. Point out the sin to your brother but do so in love and with respect and not condemnation. Anonymous wrote: Tell me, if you believe that death penalty is justified under Romans 13:1-5, what is wrong with stoning for adultery? Why wouldn't it be? We are told to submit to the authorities and if they say there is a death penalty (FOR A CRIME) then we should submit just the same. If we do what is right, we have nothing to fear. Even if we are unjustly accused we need to submit. 1 Peter 2:1-21 For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, Phillip, and many many others were submissive unto death. They were executed by the authorities, but I don't believe I ever heard about them protesting the death penalty. Jesus stopped a stoning, but he did not order an end to the practice. He calls on his followers to show mercy, not the secular authorities. That's how I see it anyway.
"Live long and prosper." -
Maybe I did not express it right, but my point is that if death penalty is still valid under Christian faith, so is stoning. So why do christians oppose Muslims' stoning and enforcing other OT laws? But if there is country with laws entirely based on Christian faith, then by Pauls words, death penalty or stoning should not be among its laws. Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocritical.
-
Anonymous wrote: Yet a Christian has two mutually exclusive choices when it comes to Biblical laws: Either to live by the laws of Old Testament, punishsments for which include death penalty, stoning etc. or to live in Christ. We don't live under Biblical laws, we live under secular laws made by secular authorities which have been established by God. If these laws call for the death penalty then we need to abide by them unless they stand in the way of us obeying God (Acts 4). Anonymous wrote: It also means that while obeying the laws of the land, a Christian should not take active part in judging others (Romans 2:1-4)under the mosaic law or carrying out the sentences under Mosaic laws (including death penalty). I don't think Paul is talking about judging those who commit crimes in Romans 2. He's talking about judging sinners when we ourselves do the same things. We're hipocrites if we try to say someone should be condemned for sinning while we do the same things. Point out the sin to your brother but do so in love and with respect and not condemnation. Anonymous wrote: Tell me, if you believe that death penalty is justified under Romans 13:1-5, what is wrong with stoning for adultery? Why wouldn't it be? We are told to submit to the authorities and if they say there is a death penalty (FOR A CRIME) then we should submit just the same. If we do what is right, we have nothing to fear. Even if we are unjustly accused we need to submit. 1 Peter 2:1-21 For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. Jesus, Paul, Peter, James, Phillip, and many many others were submissive unto death. They were executed by the authorities, but I don't believe I ever heard about them protesting the death penalty. Jesus stopped a stoning, but he did not order an end to the practice. He calls on his followers to show mercy, not the secular authorities. That's how I see it anyway.
"Live long and prosper." -
Maybe I did not express it right, but my point is that if death penalty is still valid under Christian faith, so is stoning. So why do christians oppose Muslims' stoning and enforcing other OT laws? But if there is country with laws entirely based on Christian faith, then by Pauls words, death penalty or stoning should not be among its laws. Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocratic.
-
Maybe I did not express it right, but my point is that if death penalty is still valid under Christian faith, so is stoning. So why do christians oppose Muslims' stoning and enforcing other OT laws? But if there is country with laws entirely based on Christian faith, then by Pauls words, death penalty or stoning should not be among its laws. Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocratic.
-
Maybe I did not express it right, but my point is that if death penalty is still valid under Christian faith, so is stoning. So why do christians oppose Muslims' stoning and enforcing other OT laws? But if there is country with laws entirely based on Christian faith, then by Pauls words, death penalty or stoning should not be among its laws. Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocratic.
Anonymous wrote: Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. The Law was given by God and was therefore perfect. The Pharisees added to the Law and made it imperfect. Take the Sabbath as an example. They added so much gobbledy-gook to the actual law that you couldn't even do good works on the Sabbath. They thought it was wrong for JEsus to heal people on that day. It was a day to glorify the Lord, but they turned it into a day of sloth and laziness. Its true that the Law was a shadow of things to come, of liberty in Christ. An eye for an eye is just if there is a crime committed. God established that law and Jesus does not say we should not face the consequences of sin (I think 1 Peter 2 talks about consequences of breaking the law). I do think God calls us to show mercy for those that are repentent, just as he shows it for us. Jesus was able to see the heart of the woman and saw she was repentant. He also told her to go and "sin no more." Anonymous wrote: Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. He was not an alternative, he was the fulfillment of the law or the embodiment of it. Just as we are made perfect through him, the law was also made perfect through him. We have freedom because we now have an atoning sacrifice for all sins for all time. When we sin, we simply must be repentant and confess to the Lord and they are forgiven (1 John 1). We no longer have a yoke of slavery, the Law, that condemns us. If we have the Spirit of truth living in us we will be compelled to do good works (Galatians 5, 1 John 3). Anonymous wrote: Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocratic. Sinners are not punishing sinners. The authorities are punishing those that break the law. Whether its stoning or flogging, they have the authority to carry out the punishm
-
Anonymous wrote: Jesus talked many times about imperfection of the Old Testament laws --For example, Sabbath. Laws are imperfect because those who enforce them are imperfect. If the OT laws and punishments were enough, there is no need for Christianity. Also, clearly Jesus was not in favor of the eye-for-an-eye stuff (on which the death penalty is based). Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. The Law was given by God and was therefore perfect. The Pharisees added to the Law and made it imperfect. Take the Sabbath as an example. They added so much gobbledy-gook to the actual law that you couldn't even do good works on the Sabbath. They thought it was wrong for JEsus to heal people on that day. It was a day to glorify the Lord, but they turned it into a day of sloth and laziness. Its true that the Law was a shadow of things to come, of liberty in Christ. An eye for an eye is just if there is a crime committed. God established that law and Jesus does not say we should not face the consequences of sin (I think 1 Peter 2 talks about consequences of breaking the law). I do think God calls us to show mercy for those that are repentent, just as he shows it for us. Jesus was able to see the heart of the woman and saw she was repentant. He also told her to go and "sin no more." Anonymous wrote: Above all one of the purposes all Jesus's resurrection is to release humanity from the burden of Old Testment laws by giving them an alternative. He was not an alternative, he was the fulfillment of the law or the embodiment of it. Just as we are made perfect through him, the law was also made perfect through him. We have freedom because we now have an atoning sacrifice for all sins for all time. When we sin, we simply must be repentant and confess to the Lord and they are forgiven (1 John 1). We no longer have a yoke of slavery, the Law, that condemns us. If we have the Spirit of truth living in us we will be compelled to do good works (Galatians 5, 1 John 3). Anonymous wrote: Personally I belive by stopping one stoning, Jesus stopped all stoning. Since we are all sinners and sinners punishing other sinners is totally hypocratic. Sinners are not punishing sinners. The authorities are punishing those that break the law. Whether its stoning or flogging, they have the authority to carry out the punishm
Though it looks like our views run pararllel, I think I need to make a few more points. Jason Henderson wrote: The Law was given by God and was therefore perfect Jason Henderson wrote: He was not an alternative, he was the fulfillment of the law Does this mean that everything is perfect since everything is given by God? Besides, anything that is not fullfilled or incomplete is not perfect (though not all complete things are perfect). So it implies laws were not perfect and if they were, since they were given by God, then nothing is imperfect since everything is given by God. Jason Henderson wrote: An eye for an eye is just if there is a crime committed. In the context of Old Testament, the laws and the punishments are related to sins not crimes. The nature and definition of the sin is decided by God and the definition of the crime is decided by the Governing bodys. Most times, these two are at odds with eatch other. So there is any obvious difference here. In OT, the primary purpose of the death peanlty is a punishment for a sin (though it also happened to be the law of the Jewish land). Of course Christians are bound to obey the laws of the land, but actively supporting and carrying out death penalty and stoning is not differnt from actively supporting and undergoing circumcision. Remember, if you choose to obey some laws, you are bound to obey all laws, including circumcision (By actively supporting the laws I mean that creating the environment that the laws become the laws of the land,for example, for voting for death penalty.). Jason Henderson wrote: Sinners are not punishing sinners. Jason Henderson wrote: Jesus was able to see the heart of the woman and saw she was repentant. He also told her to go and "sin no more." ok but why did Jesus specifically say "those without sin"? A true Christian lives by Mathew 5-38 or else words of Jesus are wasted.