Posted on 07/10/2011 4:44:11 AM PDT by expat1000
..THE RAPING AND BLUDGEONING THAT AMERICANS WON'T DO
Obama bizarrely decided to intervene in a death penalty case in Texas on behalf of a rapist and murderer, also international law.
In 1994, he kidnapped 16-year-old Adria Sauceda, raped her with a large stick, and bludgeoned her to death with a piece of asphalt.
Just remember. Obama will not pay your mortgage. But if you rape and bludgeon a 16 year old girl to death... he'll be there for you.
The San Francisco Chronicle asks, "Is Rick Perry Killing His Way To The White House?". Here's a better headline. "Is Obama Defending Stick Rapists and Asphalt Bludgeoners To Stay in the White House". The answer obviously, yes.
Obama picked this fight for two reasons. Reason 1 is the Mexican vote. Reason 2 is Rick Perry. The Vienna Convention on Consular Relations and the Importance of Protecting Rapists and Bludgeoners is a distant hum in the background. As much as Obama is a fan of making US law subsidiary to Pakistani law, this is more about making Perry choose between Texas voting bases and pandering to Mexican voters at the same time.
The Mexican government is already angry. Which can have dangerous implications. What if Mexico decides to boycott us and refuse us to send us their rapists and bludgeoners? How will we find Americans to do their raping and bludgeoning for them?
The perverse part is that Humberto Leal Garcia, oppressed by the racist gringo system of executing murderers, is a cause celebre in Mexico. His last words were, "Viva Mexico". Now the man who bludgeoned a 16 year old girl to death after raping her with a stick becomes a Mexican national hero.
(Excerpt) Read more at sultanknish.blogspot.com ...
Apparently, according to witnesses etc, he accepted Jesus before his death, so Hell would not have a new resident, if he was genuine, Heaven would have a new resident.
Yep, I recall that now. Thanks. That makes two. I know they were on him pretty bad for the number of executions on his watch in Texas. He won anyway.
Yeah, but I think he voided it when he went out yelling, “Viva Mexico!”
only God knows his heart, I cannot say. I’m hoping not to find out right away, I still have three wee kids to look after and an ex wife who is not a christian, so I’m their only source of spiritual guidance, I figure I should attempt to stick around for a bit. At some point though I’ll know the answer to whether or not this guy landed with Jesus.
“If that isn’t the dumbest thing I’ve ever read on FR, it is on a short list!”
Bush wanted his amnesty for 10 million illegal aliens, and fought his own party for it. I thought that was kinda’ dumb.
I personally believe that GOD would not want a new resident who malisciously rapes and kills an innocent young woman for his own pleasure. Do not hand us that born again crap when it comes to a crime such as this.
My understanding is that when Dubya called Perry to try to get him to put a stay on the execution Perry said “I don’t want to be disrespectful Mr. Bush but you are not the President anymore and this is a state matter”. I guess he told Obowbow something similar.
People who states this stuff are the biggest sinners you will ever see. They are hypocrites to humanity itself.
“It was a woman—pick ax murderer who found religion on death row. Surprise.”
Karla Faye Tucker. She was a real piece of work.
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/women/tucker/1.html
Surely you are wrong! For eight straight years of his presidency and still today the left has told us that G.W. Bush is a right wing nut case who rides far to the right of Genghis Kahn. They are so intelligent and so honest that it is simply not possible that they are either mistaken or deliberately deceiving us. Everything that is not perfect on Earth is the fault of George Walker Bush...except that which is the fault of George HERBERT Walker Bush. STAY OUT DA BUSHES, STAY OUT DA BUSHES!!!!
Bush wanted his amnesty for 10 million illegal aliens
Do you not understand the difference?
"Aren't you tired of fomenting vitriol and spewing out hate?"
Sounds like you would condemn King David, Paul the Apostle and true Jesus Christ (not your plush toy Genie Jesus) given the opportunity.
"Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, And not be written with the righteous."Psalms 69:28
"But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!... for you neither go in [to heaven] yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in...Therefore you will receive greater condemnation... you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves.(Matthew 23:13-15)
"Alexander the coppersmith did me much harm. May the Lord repay him according to his works." (2 Tim 4:14-15)
And of course the chorus of heaven, of all the Saints who have gone before us beg:
"And they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?" (Revelation 6:10)
So why does God's Judgment offend you? Do you love sin and feel that it should go unpunished? Do you enjoy the prospect of God's Holiness being mocked? Do you hate Righteousness and want to see Wickedness prosper?
"for [government] does not bear the sword in vain; for [government] is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil."(Romans 13:4-5)
Remember, Paul was writing this before he, and many other fellow believers were executed by Nero.
I work with a number of native and legal Hispanics, and they all were OK with Texas executing this thug. They had some fence sitting "brothers" who were not so sure, but after I gave them the grizzly details about the rape and killing, they wanted him gone too. One of my workers had the beer iced down, and the minute he heard the thug was dead, he fired up his pit for fajitas.
"People who states this stuff are the biggest sinners you will ever see. They are hypocrites to humanity itself."
"Sounds like you would condemn King David, Paul the Apostle and true Jesus Christ (not your plush toy Genie Jesus) given the opportunity."
Jesus Christ, the Lord and Saviour of mankind, came to put an end to the old law (i.e. "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, etc.). This is not to say that one can expect to escape the rule of "reaping what one sows." There is, however, forgiveness for all once they have repented and surrendered their heart and life to Jesus. YOU may not forgive, however, God does. That is God's word and his promise. Come now, and let us reason together, saith the LORD: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.(Isaiah 1:18)
Please read the gospel of Matthew, chapter 6 (especially verses 14,15). And, may God bless you all as you yield to His will.
“Do you not understand the difference?”
Evidently you don’t understand irony.
Actually I prefer Ecclesiastes 1-12 myself.
I should define that better to Ecclesiastes: Chapter 3, verses 1-12.
Jesus Christ, the Lord and Saviour of mankind, came to put an end to the old law (i.e. "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, etc.).
That is exactly the opposite of what our LORD said. If you bothered to read the passages just a few paragraphs of the reading assignment you gave to us, you would know that you have unwittingly taken on the side of the Enemy of God by your position.
"Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill... Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.( Matthew 5:17-20 )
As you can see from this passage, our LORD came to fulfill the Law, not do away with it as you have claimed. Are you really going to claim that God is now OK with murder, adultery, lying, stealing and blasphemy? Those are a few of the Top Ten Laws that you claim that He did away with. Has God changed?
There is, however, forgiveness for all once they have repented and surrendered their heart and life to Jesus.
This statement makes absolutely no sense if the Law has been abolished. If there is no law, then there is no sin. If there is no sin, there is no offense to God. If there is no offense to God then there is no need for forgiveness. Are you ready to throw out the first seven chapters of Paul's Epistle to the Romans? Are you prepared to eliminate the totality of the Doctrines of Redemption?
Furthermore, what is this "surrender your heart" foolishness? In light of Ezekiel 36:26-28, there doesn't appear to be a God who made you asking you for permission to do some remodeling. And why would you agree? The Scriptures say that the natural man hates God, hates the Gospel, hates righteousness and follows gladly after his father the Devil. To claim that one "surrenders their heart" is to deny the Fall and reject the orthodox doctrines of the Atonement.
"YOU may not forgive, however, God does. That is God's word and his promise."
You have just contradicted yourself. You just claimed that God's forgiveness is conditional predicated on the recipient first performing the works of "surrendering one's heart" and "repenting". Absent those two works, you claimed there is no forgiveness. For future reference, you left out one of the mandatory conditions - "Confession". Furthermore, your claim on "all" is incorrect too. Blaspheming of the Holy Spirit is not forgiven (Matthew 12:32).
Its pretty clear that you are not a theologian neither one trained in the Greek, and that is OK, that is why we have professional clergy. Nonetheless, like the word "love" in the English has three (some argue four) different distinctions in the Scriptures (agape, philo, eros). Forgiveness also has definite distinctions in the Greek used in Scripture. For example, from Mark 2:7 we know that only God has the power to forgive sins. From 1 John 5:16 we learn of two categories of sins, one that does, and the other that does not "lead to death". In the OT the word in the LXX to denote forgiveness of sins was not the same as used in the NT of God. In the OT, sins were not forgiven but were "paresis" or suspending the just penalty of sins. It wasn't until the cross where "aphesis" took place and sins actually were released.
So when you make this odd demand that man is to forgive as Christ, only God can forgive sins. Even you recognize that God only forgives AFTER repentance [and confession]. Your reading assignment was incomplete for you should have also included in the study practical application of forgiveness as seen in Matthew 18:15-17. You would most certainly have come to a better conclusion that the foolishness that you dispensed.
If a "brother offends you", then it is incumbent upon you to go secretly to him and tell him his fault. If he doesn't care, then come back with "two or more". If that doesn't work, then separate yourself from him. Did you see forgiveness in there? If you did, then you don't understand the Gospel. The Gospel teaches that man offends God, through the Law and Prophets we learn of our transgressions. He has sent many to tell us privately and publicly of our transgressions, and for those who do not repent and confess, there awaits Outer Darkness.
You also failed to mention forgiving as often as "seventy times seven" in that for as long as the offending brother keeps offending but returning in repentance and confession there should always be forgiveness - and that is the lesson you didn't learn in the reading assignment you gave us.
Now back to the context of this thread. The victim is dead. There could be no forgiveness from the dead girl. From what we know, the murderer never repented of his sin to God, and even according to you unrepentant and unconfessed sin is not forgiven by God.
Thus the man is burning in Hell. Justice has been served.
That is not what was reported elsewhere. Nevertheless ...
Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:1,2)
But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful. Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: (Luke 6:35-37)
Shalom
..."That is not what was reported elsewhere. Nevertheless ..."
(sigh)And Hitler, Stalin and a whole host of other atheists and creeps are all said to have had death-bed conversions too because it makes for such a swell story.
So then you quote, without comment Matthew 7:1,2 like everyone is supposed to read your mind. I am going to assume that the context of that passage in terms of this exchange of ours is to mean that you can't distinguish good from evil and ironically abhor the idea that someone can. You do realize that in posting Matthew 7:1-2 in the context in which you did that you are being quite the hypocrite because you are judging everyone's intentions, that is, you are the one Christ is speaking of in the rest of that paragraph (v 3-5). Furthermore it is clear evidence that the Bible is a closed book to you, because if you cared to read just a few paragraphs down you would come across this gem from our LORD
You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit.(Matt 7:16-17)
Off hand, I wouldn't be risking being wrong by suggesting that the unrepented brutal rape and murder of this young girl is an example of "bearing bad fruit". You may struggle with finding anything wrong there, but that isn't my problem.
I must say though, you have proven to be a virtual cornucopia of really atrocious doctrine where it seems every eisegesis that you have posted is fully contradictory to the Bible. I am convinced that you are guided by a template that is not found in Scripture and when presented with the Truth seem to be pleased in being immune to orthodoxy.
I am tempted to clear up the gross misunderstand of the reference to Matthew 7 as it seems to be applied here, but past experience guides me to believe that it too would be completely ignored. Fitting perfectly with the teachings of v6. So many lessons in such little text.
(and I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to convey, in context of this thread with Luke 6:35-37)
Take care. Its been interesting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.