Hypocrisy on the Left!

[Tarheel Baptist]

But, don't call them bitter!
Evidently, bitter people really hate to be called such.... ;D

 

[Castor Muscular]

But, don't call them bitter!
Evidently, bitter people really hate to be called such.... ;D

What makes them so bitter about being called bitter?

 

[Rainbow Warrior]

Wow, not so macho are we? Call for your mommies to protect you

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

But, don't call them bitter!
Evidently, bitter people really hate to be called such.... ;D

What makes them so bitter about being called bitter?

I think it's the bitterness that makes them so bitter about being called bitter...

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

 

[Rainbow Warrior]

Is that what Jesus meant by "praying for your enemies"?

 

[graceandtruth]

Is that what Jesus meant by "praying for your enemies"?

How does your question relate to the post you quoted?  Unless you are commending the 80 year old woman who was arrested for praying.

 

[Vandal]

Can you clarify the statement that Jess assumed homeowners were armed

Am I the Holy Spirit?  Read the 4 Gospels through, in the King James Bible,  asking  God for wisdom concerning armed homeownership.  He it is which shall guide you into all truth.

Anishinabe

Why does it have to be a KJB? Why not a NIV?,NLT? They are after all, translations from the originals

To even look apon just one of the accursed pages of the NIV will damn you to hell!!!!! ???

Prophet is just looking out for your very soul. Heed the word of the Prophet... ;D

ahem, it's 'prophet',  not 'Prophet'.

Anishinabe

:-[

 

[Tarheel Baptist]

 

[Castor Muscular]

If his exercise was "stomp on Mohammed", he'd be dead or in jail by now. 

The future does not belong to those who would slander Islam.  The future belongs to those who will slander Christ. 

 

[Recovering IFB]

As Rainbow Warrior said, are we praying for our enemies?

 

[Recovering IFB]

Meaning rainbow quoting Jesus!!

 

[ALAYMAN]

Exo 22:2  If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.

And the next verse?
[/quote]


It's a very nice one, inspired, infallible, inerrant, THEE very word of God. 

What about it?  Does it nullify the fact that, at a bare minimum, at least in some circumstances, God has given warrant to protect one's person to the extent that deadly force is permissible?

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=prophet]I said "Jesus assumed homeowners were 'armed'", and defended their 'goods', and used this societal norm as a comparison, in a lesson.[/quote]

No. He told a story to make a point. There is nothing in there about societal expectations. Have you researched Jewish life in first century Israel?

[quote author=prophet]Armed defense = killing[/quote]

Sometimes.

[quote author=prophet]...because home invasion = killing.[/quote]

No.

[quote author=prophet]Check the laws in your state, home invasion carries the same penalty as murder1 in most of them. [/quote]

And no.

[quote author=prophet]If I came in your house, and stuck a pistol in your face, and took your stuff....you'd call the police on me. They would show up armed.  They would apprehend me...[/quote]

Yes.

[quote author=prophet]...and I would face the same penalty as a murderer. [/quote]

And no.

[quote author=prophet]You'd let someone else, who you pay to represent you, carry the arms.[/quote]

Yes, there is that whole "render unto Caesar" thing and the "obey the authorities" thing.

[quote author=prophet]You are a phony.  Jesus never called religious teachers/ leaders phony... oh except for the 14 times in Matthew.

Anishinabe[/quote]

I'm fully aware of who Jesus is and what He did. Oh yeah...it didn't include telling people to blow someone away for trying to take their TV.

 

[rsc2a]

I have often noted this hypocrisy also exists on the religious left.
SOME of those who constantly ridicule the fundys for their intolerance, judgementalism, and name calling use the same tactics on the fundys.....

Agreed.

 

[rsc2a]

Exo 22:2  If a thief be found breaking up, and be smitten that he die, there shall no blood be shed for him.

And the next verse?

It's a very nice one, inspired, infallible, inerrant, THEE very word of God. 

What about it?  Does it nullify the fact that, at a bare minimum, at least in some circumstances, God has given warrant to protect one's person to the extent that deadly force is permissible?[/quote]

He also gave warrant in some circumstances to stone your children for disobedience. I don't recommend that practice either.

 

[ALAYMAN]

He also gave warrant in some circumstances to stone your children for disobedience. I don't recommend that practice either.

So by your hermeneutical apparatus we can have no moral application(s) from the OT?

The principle in the stoning law is to help ensure a child (and the people of God, parents particularly) recognizes the heinous nature of rebellion.  It is compared to witchcraft elsewhere.  That principle is still amply presented in the New Testament.  The manner in which the principle is communicated in the NT doesn't call for stoning, but, such rebellious disobedience is placed alongside of some of the most egregious sins known to man.

The moral principle in Exodus 22 is that of the right to self-defense in the event that a person may be a threat to your life, or your family's life.  Twist that however you will, but it still comes out that God values the dignity of life, and in doing so, he appointed the death penalty (also repeated in Romans 13) for those who disregard it.

 

[rsc2a]

[quote author=ALAYMAN]So by your hermeneutical apparatus we can have no moral application(s) from the OT?[/quote]

Did I say that?

[quote author=ALAYMAN]The principle in the stoning law is to help ensure a child (and the people of God, parents particularly) recognizes the heinous nature of rebellion.  It is compared to witchcraft elsewhere.  That principle is still amply presented in the New Testament.  The manner in which the principle is communicated in the NT doesn't call for stoning, but, such rebellious disobedience is placed alongside of some of the most egregious sins known to man.[/quote]

Yes. Like murder...which is what you'd be doing if you unloaded on a guy who was jimmying your locks to get your radio.

The moral principle in Exodus 22 is that of the right to self-defense in the event that a person may be a threat to your life, or your family's life.

That part there...it doesn't mean you get to knock someone off because they are stealing your TV.

[quote author=ALAYMAN]Twist that however you will, but it still comes out that God values the dignity of life, and in doing so, he appointed the death penalty (also repeated in Romans 13) for those who disregard it.[/quote]

God also said, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

 

[Castor Muscular]

That part there...it doesn't mean you get to knock someone off because they are stealing your TV.

You can in Texas.  In fact, you can kill people messing with your car, even if it's parked in the street in front of your house.  That's still considered your property. 

[Actually, you are permitted to use deadly force, which is subtly different from intent to kill.  Either way, if you kill the robber, you will not be charged with a crime.]

 

[ALAYMAN]

Did I say that?

I find it best to ask questions of clarification from you because you seem to like to equivocate, obfuscate, and/or deflect, sort of like you just did with that question.

Yes. Like murder...which is what you'd be doing if you unloaded on a guy who was jimmying your locks to get your radio....That part there...it doesn't mean you get to knock someone off because they are stealing your TV.

The point has clearly enough been made by those on the opposite side of the aisle from you, there are times when a person in their home will not know of the intent of the home invader.  If they were merely there to take stuff, your point would <potentially> be morally valid, but by you denying that there is an element of uncertainty as to the homeowner's ability reasonably discern with certainty that the thief is MERELY a thief (and not a drugged up murderer wannabe), then you are ignoring the reality that a person can act without malice towards the invader by using sufficient force that could result in death.

God also said, "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

I'm not advocating the death penalty for adultery.  Apples to oranges, and your willingness to use such Scriptures in defense of your weak position only highlights your inability to properly apply the word.