Posted on 04/30/2018 7:42:16 AM PDT by rktman
Paul says no such thing. If he had, he would be contradicting the Bible's explicit instruction.
"The wages of sin is death" (ultimate repose in the lake of fire), but the not EVERY sin is worthy of the death penalty in this life as the Bible attests:
Not every sin is a capital crime. But, sexual sins, because they are so disordered, in almost every instance merit death.
Now if you think it’s in the best interests of society to institute the death penalty for homosexuality, you should just make that argument. However, if you are going to claim we need to do it because God commands it, then you should at least be consistent and demand the death penalty for the rest of the capital crimes listed in the OT law as well.
By all means. It's righteous implementation would serve us well. Just because our current society and culture have fallen from just laws, doesn't mean we should accept it. It's imperative that we restore the ancient markers. ("Remove not the ancient landmark thy fathers have set." Provers 22:28)
Are we living in the ancient kingdom of Israel? If not, then those laws can hardly be said to be active as our civic laws. If so, then we had better hurry up and catch up on all those ritual sacrifices their prescribe, and start stoning adulterers and all sorts of other offenders too.
It's rather obvious that you have not read the Bible carefully and are unaware of much of what it teaches about the law, specifically what is and is not still binding under the New Covenant. (Paul's epistle to the Hebrews, specifically chapters 8 and 9 touches upon ordinances "Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation." Hebrews 9:10). The rest of the code has not been repealed. And we still honor in our laws some of God's legal code: Murder, theft and bearing false witness, some sexual sins are still against the law. Each of these have penalties in this life.
Paul explains how we are to conduct ourselves within civil society in Romans 13:
4 But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil. 5 Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. (Romans 13:4,5)
So, I reject the "anarchy" you are erroneously claim is in effect, as if the law has been done away with. ("Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." Romans 3:31). And as to what laws should be implemented, you can keep your ritual sacrifices (fulfilled by Christ) and I'll take God's laws against murder, theft, fornication, adultery, sodomy and witchcraft, which will go a long way in restoring decency and personal responsibility back to our culture.
I addressed this error in my previous post, but I wanted elaborate on the Bible's doctrine on death.
The Bible speaks of two deaths. Because of sin we all will experience the first death, the death of the flesh -- and some sooner than later, because of the kind of sin they have committed (capital crimes). Those condemned through due process of capital crimes (sodomy, adultery, etc) are to be killed immediately, rather than waiting for natural death. Thieves must pay restitution. In constrast liars must pay different prices, which depends on their lie. If they provide false testimony in capital crimes, then they must suffer the penalty of the crime their false testimony would have condemned the innocent man. (See Deuteronomy 19:16-19).
The unsaved sinner, who wishes to be judged based on his own works, rather than the finished work of Jesus Christ on the cross, he will experience what the Bible calls the "second death".
In Revelation 20 at the great white throne of the judgement the resurrected dead will stand before God and will be judged out of the books and be cast in the lake of fire, second death.
Liberals want to gas all Christians. Go ahead, ask them. They’ll be proud to proclaim their hatred.
“Paul says no such thing.”
Well, if we read Romans 1:32 and the immediately following verse 2:1, it says:
” Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.
Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things.”
He is clearly saying that those who commit such crimes are worthy of death, and that WHOSOEVER judges them is doing the same things, and therefore must also be worthy of death. That covers the whole human race, except for the Lord Jesus.
Now, we could say that Paul is talking about us being worthy of the ultimate death, and not immediate death, but since you tried to use these verses to justify judicial penalties, we would have to apply them consistently and sentence the whole human race to a death penalty. It’s either one or the other. Either these verses don’t justify the death penalty for all sins (and therefore don’t justify the death penalty for just a few sins either), or they do justify the death penalty for all sins.
“By all means. It’s righteous implementation would serve us well.... It’s imperative that we restore the ancient markers.”
Well, alright then. Go ahead and convince the public that we should institute those laws (including executing everyone who has ever cursed their parents, anyone who has worked on the sabbath, or blasphemed, as those are also capital crimes despite you seeming to only want to focus on “sexual” ones). I look forward to seeing how successful that campaign is.
“It’s rather obvious that you have not read the Bible carefully and are unaware of much of what it teaches about the law...”
I find it quite ironic that such an accusation comes from someone who insists on legalisms that have not been pursued by our notable Christian exemplars since the fall of Israel. Even Jesus himself, before the fall of Israel, rescued a woman who was to be put to death for adultery, and kept a former prostitute as a disciple, rather than insisting she be put to death. It seems Christ himself fell short of your understanding of the law.
“Paul explains how we are to conduct ourselves within civil society in Romans 13:”
Yet Romans 13 is telling us to obey our rulers (the CURRENT ones), rather than insisting that some former set of laws our rulers have not adopted should apply. Doesn’t seem to support your general argument.
“So, I reject the “anarchy” you are erroneously claim is in effect, as if the law has been done away with.”
Of course I’ve claimed no such thing, or you could quote me saying such.
“And as to what laws should be implemented, you can keep your ritual sacrifices (fulfilled by Christ) and I’ll take God’s laws against murder, theft, fornication, adultery, sodomy and witchcraft, which will go a long way in restoring decency and personal responsibility back to our culture.”
Only those? What about blasphemy? Idolatry? Cursing your parents? Breaking the sabbath? Why pick and choose? Or is it perhaps that we couldn’t implement such a system since just about everyone in the country would be condemned and there wouldn’t be anyone left to swing the axe that causes you to be selective?
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.