I am pretty confident DNA technology won't be disproven. Improved but not disproven.It takes a while for things to be proven - and often what is proven today is disproven tomorrow.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I am pretty confident DNA technology won't be disproven. Improved but not disproven.It takes a while for things to be proven - and often what is proven today is disproven tomorrow.
The World is the "outside" from which we were called (we do not judge those " outside). The World is already condemned. It is meaningless to try and make the World to stop being murderers, haters, adulterous, etc. They do not need to stop doing wrong things. They need the gospel.You lost me there. You say the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but you also say that the U.S. (not God's people, therefore the world) is sinning when practicing the death penalty. It seems like you are contradicting yourself. I don't get your point.
Does not matter. Scripture requires the testimony of two witnesses (of God's people) to execute a member of the congregation for sinning against God. This is not about proof but God's voice in His people.I am pretty confident DNA technology won't be disproven. Improved but not disproven.
I aim to please.In speaking with you lot I could have a breakfast of champions and still feel disillusioned.
Jesus did not stop the stoning.Does not matter. Scripture requires the testimony of two witnesses (of God's people) to execute a member of the congregation for sinning against God. This is not about proof but God's voice in His people.
And by this standard Jesus sinned (per the Law Jesus had an obligation to stone the woman caught in adultry).
Did He encourage them to do their due diligence? Why did Jesus not kill her Himself?Jesus did not stop the stoning.
I don't know what you talking about "Gods voice in His people."
Peter didIt's a sin if you use violence to do so. Jesus taught against it and none practiced violent self-defense in the NT.
Oh He isn’t allowed to. It’s the magistrates job. Haven’t you been paying attention?Did He encourage them to do their due diligence? Why did Jesus not kill her Himself?
Lol.....yea. The "arm of the church"
Oh He isn’t allowed to. It’s the magistrates job. Haven’t you been paying attention?
It was a trap set for Him. Justice was not their objective. Caught in the very act. The man was not there being stoned. Justice was not the object. Trapping Jesus was the object.Did He encourage them to do their due diligence? Why did Jesus not kill her Himself?
So Jesus did the wrong thing so as not to fall into a trap?It was a trap set for Him. Justice was not their objective. Caught in the very act. The man was not there being stoned. Justice was not the object. Trapping Jesus was the object.
Did Jesus do the wrong thing?So Jesus did the wrong thing so as not to fall into a trap?
The others has alreforgiveness.
Jesus knew her sin.
BUT He did not condemn her.
The women who would be put to death under the law was forgiven.
He actually did. He said "let those among you who have not sinned cast the first stone". Whoever cast the first stone would be denying they had sinned.Did Jesus do the wrong thing?
He did not tell them to stone her or not to stone her.
I think you missed the entire point of the story. The trap was set for Jesus and He turned the situation.He actually did. He said "let those among you who have not sinned cast the first stone". Whoever cast the first stone would be denying they had sinned.
They did not set a trap. Jesus had the trap was already set....and it was not to trap Jesus.
Do you believe Jesus should have stoned her or forgiven her?
Why?
Notice what happened after Peter cut off the ear of one of the ones that was intent on capturing the Lord:Peter did
They tried to trap Jesus. But the actual trap was for them:I think you missed the entire point of the story. The trap was set for Jesus and He turned the situation.
You got me thinking so I consulted Macarthur.
"8:6 a trap . . . accusing him. If Jesus rejected the law of Moses (Lev 20:10; Dt 22:22), His credibility would be gone. If He held to Mosaic law, His reputation for compassion and forgiveness would have been questioned.
8:7 any one of you who is without sin. This directly refers to Dt 13:9; 17:7, where the witnesses of a crime are to start the execution. Only those who were not guilty of the same sin could participate."
Just as I thought.
I do not know.If we were to poll Jon and Jane Q Public in the USA to ask the question as to religious convictions having status over and above secular conviction, what do you think you would see? Well if American lifestyle today is any indication.
You do realize I was referring to the original 13 States. Religion in the Original 13 Colonies - Under God - ProCon.orgI was curious about your state commentary so I looked it up for New Jersey and yes they honored the Church of England then... but I also found this, In recent years, irreligion has been an increasing force in Jersey, with two fifths of the population identifying as having no religion. This number rises to 52% for Jersey people under 35.
So NJ is fast turning into a irreligious state.
So to clarify, the death penalty is a sin but not to the world but to the Christian.
I cannot see how you reconcile the assertions you are making. If the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but to the Christian, and, if you bolster this argument by saying it is meaningless to try to make the world stop being murderers, haters, and adulterers, are you not in effect arguing that -- like the death penalty -- murder, hate, and adultery are only sins for Christians?The World is the "outside" from which we were called (we do not judge those " outside). The World is already condemned. It is meaningless to try and make the World to stop being murderers, haters, adulterous, etc.
It's my wording (I am wrong to say "not a sin to the world").I cannot see how you reconcile the assertions you are making. If the death penalty is not a sin to the world, but to the Christian, and, if you bolster this argument by saying it is meaningless to try to make the world stop being murderers, haters, and adulterers, are you not in effect arguing that -- like the death penalty -- murder, hate, and adultery are only sins for Christians?