IAP Political Forum

THOU SHALT NOT SUFFER A WITCH TO LIVE.

Matthew 5:17-48 (Amplified Bible)
Amplified Bible (AMP)
Copyright © 1954, 1958, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1987 by The Lockman Foundation

   
17Do not think that I have come to do away with or [a]undo the Law or the Prophets; I have come not to do away with or undo but to complete and fulfill them.

    18For truly I tell you, until the sky and earth pass away and perish, not one smallest letter nor one little hook [identifying certain Hebrew letters] will pass from the Law until all things [it foreshadows] are accomplished.

    19Whoever then breaks or does away with or relaxes one of the least [important] of these commandments and teaches men so shall be called least [important] in the kingdom of heaven, but he who practices them and teaches others to do so shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

    20For I tell you, unless your righteousness (your uprightness and your right standing with God) is more than that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

    21You have heard that it was said to the men of old, You shall not kill, and whoever kills shall be liable to and unable to escape the punishment imposed by the court.(A)

    22But I say to you that everyone who continues to be [c]angry with his brother or harbors malice (enmity of heart) against him shall be [d]liable to and unable to escape the punishment imposed by the court; and whoever speaks contemptuously and insultingly to his brother shall be [e]liable to and unable to escape the punishment imposed by the Sanhedrin, and whoever says, You [f]cursed fool! [You empty-headed idiot!] shall be [g]liable to and unable to escape the hell (Gehenna) of fire.

    23So if when you are offering your gift at the altar you there remember that your brother has any [grievance] against you,

    24Leave your gift at the altar and go. First make peace with your brother, and then come back and present your gift.

    25Come to terms quickly with your accuser while you are on the way traveling with him, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the judge to the guard, and you be put in prison.

    26Truly I say to you, you will not be released until you have paid the last fraction of a penny.

    27You have heard that it was said, You shall not commit adultery.(B)

    28But I say to you that everyone who so much as looks at a woman with evil desire for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart.

    29If your right eye serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, pluck it out and throw it away. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your whole body be cast into hell (Gehenna).

    30And if your right hand serves as a trap to ensnare you or is an occasion for you to stumble and sin, cut it off and cast it from you. It is better that you lose one of your members than that your entire body should be cast into hell (Gehenna).

    31It has also been said, Whoever divorces his wife must give her a certificate of divorce.

    32But I tell you, Whoever dismisses and repudiates and divorces his wife, except on the grounds of unfaithfulness (sexual immorality), causes her to commit adultery, and whoever marries a woman who has been divorced commits adultery.(C)

    33Again, you have heard that it was said to the men of old, You shall not swear falsely, but you shall perform your oaths to the Lord [as a religious duty].

    34But I tell you, Do not bind yourselves by an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is the throne of God;

    35Or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.(D)

    36And do not swear by your head, for you are not able to make a single hair white or black.

    37Let your Yes be simply Yes, and your No be simply No; anything more than that comes from the evil one.(E)

    38You have heard that it was said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.(F)

    39But I say to you, Do not resist the evil man [who injures you]; but if anyone strikes you on the right jaw or cheek, turn to him the other one too.

    40And if anyone wants to sue you and take your undershirt (tunic), let him have your coat also.

    41And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two [miles].

    42Give to him who keeps on begging from you, and do not turn away from him who would borrow [[h]at interest] from you.(G)
    43You have heard that it was said, You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy;(H)

    44But I tell you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,(I)

    45To show that you are the children of your Father Who is in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the wicked and on the good, and makes the rain fall upon the upright and the wrongdoers [alike].

    46For if you love those who love you, what reward can you have? Do not even the tax collectors do that?

    47And if you greet only your brethren, what more than others are you doing? Do not even the Gentiles (the heathen) do that?

    48You, therefore, must be perfect [growing into complete [j]maturity of godliness in mind and character, [k]having reached the proper height of virtue and integrity], as your heavenly Father is perfect.(J)

No it's not the set up to a joke.

We all know that there's some pretty horrible stuff in the Old Testament. But most Xians don't burn witches etc. So why do atheists keep bringing it up?

1) It shows that most Christians don't follow the Bible 100% - so why follow it at all?

2) It shows that these things are there and are a danger if Christianity goes the way Islam has in some places. 

Surely you must not realize that many (but not all) of the old testament commandments were either part of the social laws intended to apply to the land of Israel or specific instructions that made up the covenant Israel made with God.  Christians today are not citizens of ancient Israel and are not under the Covenant.

But let's say for sake of argument that the statement "Do not allow sorceresses to live."  in the context of social laws for the society of Israel applies today.  Please alert me to a sorceress.

I disagree completely.  Please show me these things and especially show me how one properly overcomes the reality of my first two observations of commandments written for ancient Israel. 

Of course I understand that. But it is also supposed to be the word of God. How do you decide which aspects of the word of God you are meant to follow and which you aren't?

Some people consider Wiccans to meet the definition of witch. The OT also has some rather nasty things to say about homosexuals, apostates, atheists and people of other religions too.

I don't have time to look these up right now. Do you not see that you are applying humanist principles by picking and choosing the parts of the Bible you wish to follow: You decide what's moral then discard the parts of the Bible that differ.

From the context!


Those who do should review scripture again.  While they are at it, they should have a look to be sure that the social law applies to them.  You are quite correct that the OT has some nasty things to say about these other behaviors.  The approach to these words in scripture for a person today is to be sure they understand the intent and context.


If I am interpreting the original intent of the original writer correctly and in context then i am not picking and choosing at all.  I am consistently applying the original intent in every passage and commandment.

Now, if your claim is that I am misinterpreting the writer's original intent, I would very much like to be corrected.  Please feel free to help me.

The fact that it requires interpretation undermines the claim that it is the word of God.

Do you feel that it was acceptable in pre-Christ Israel to murder suspected witches?

Is homosexuality therefore OK it 21st century Europe/America?

How does the human condition that makes understanding difficult undermine God?

No, but it would have been acceptable to bring them to the authorities.

No, the behavior still is an abomination to God.  However, as a citizen, I am to honor the laws of our society.

Because God should be able to make things clear - especially since we get an eternity in Hell if we misinterpret.

So they can be murdered. That's nice. At least you are honest: you are willing to allow someone to be murdered because they are arbitrarily defined to be a witch or sorceress.

What is a witch? How does one know? I thought God was the only one who did miracles/magic, how coem witches can too?

So if there were a referendum tomorrow as to whether or not to bring in the death penalty for homosexuality which way would you vote?

Also, how do you know that this pronouncement, that if a man lies with a man as with a woman it is abomination, still applies today?

Finally, what if one of your kids were gay? What would you say/do? (If you find this too personal then I'm sorry.)

That sounds like an opinion you hold.  How can we know it is truth? 

In any case, fortunately salvation does not depend on ones ability to interpret scripture.  Salvation only requires a choice to believe in God and your own inability to save yourself.  If you believe, you can ask God yourself and he will answer, you do not need his word to accept his gift.

The state does not commit murder.  It kills.  Our soldiers do not murder and capital punishment (whether right or wrong) is not murder.

Scripture gives one or two examples of a sorceress if I recall.  I don't know why they can perform signs, scripture does not say.  I am quite happy that those social laws don't apply to me.

 

Interesting question.  I would have to vote against it since comparable sins are not considered worthy of death.

If I were appointed to make law, it would have to be consistent.  If adultery and bestiality were punishable by death then I might vote for it, but that's not going to happen is it.

Because it is a statement of what is right and wrong.  It did not prescribe a punishment so it was not a social law for Israel and it was not a condition of the covenant.

Not at all.  I contemplate such things.  If one of my daughters announces she is gay I will treat it the same as when (especially my younger) tells me she hates me or does some other deed of disrespect.  I will tell her I love her and then I will not allow the behavior in my domain and I will tell her why it is wrong. 

Are you saying God, the creator of the universe and all that resides within it is unable to make himself clear?

Unless you interpret it in such a way that it makes belief in him impossible.

It is: deliberate killing is murder.

So what do you do if a sorceress comes to your house? I'm pretty sure there's one in mine: I heard some scurrying.

 

OK, let's say that all of the punishments outlined in the Bible all came under this one refferendum, what way would you vote then?

OK, so all punishments set down in the Bible no longer apply but the morals behind them do. Are there any other parts of the Bible that we can selectively ignore? Also, on what basis do we dismiss the covenant and the punishments therein?

I'm amazed that you would think that a child's sexuality would in some way be a rebellion against you.

What do you make of this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28

No it's not the set up to a joke.

We all know that there's some pretty horrible stuff in the Old Testament. But most Xians don't burn witches etc. So why do atheists keep bringing it up?

1) It shows that most Christians don't follow the Bible 100% - so why follow it at all?
2) It shows that these things are there and are a danger if Christianity goes the way Islam has in some places. 

If you wanted a good example of why you are a religious bigot...

No, I suspect God is perfectly clear.  I find all the trouble with the receiver.

Just a hunch, but I suspect those people had their minds made up already.

You may want to research the legal definition of murder.

The same thing I do when an atheist or a homosexual comes to my house.  I invite them in.

We ignore none of it.  We recognize the intent and we follow the intent.  We can know about these social laws and the covenant by the NT scripture instruction.  Paul and Peter and John have quite a bit to say about this topic.

You are reading too much into my example.

I find the research faulty and the conclusion unjustified.

You would.

I know a special case is made for soldiers and executioners but I still consider it murder.

But what if she puts a curse on you?

What about the fact that Jesus said he wanted to uphold the law not overturn it?

I do too. Yet it still seems plausible that there would be genetic risk-factors (for the want of a better term).

Yes, but you also consider agnostics atheists too, and you seem to have some problem with truth but I can't put my finger on it just yet.

Then it might not have been a good idea after all.

Right,  The law was completed not overturned.  When he said that he had not completed (upheld) was he came to accomplish.

No, I suspect God is perfectly clear.  I find all the trouble with the receiver.

You perhaps.

So then if people are incapable of correctly interpreting God's word who's fault is it?

In scripture it says that misinterpretation is caused by people who harden their hearts and minds to Gods message.  Scripture indicates that people are capable but many are unwilling.

¿Scripture? ¿Which scripture? Here in my hand I have a Harry Potter book, ¿should i believe in what is written there?

The argument 'this book says' is worth nothing: i can get another book which says the opposite or write it myself.

You should better say: someone wrote X and Y in a book about 2000 years ago and i believe that fictional book accurately describes facts because of no reason.

PD: I don't want to be harsh with the following, but i think that your nick is misleading: reason and faith are completely unrelated things.

Yes but then we would be talking about a false God.

I beg to differ. I contend that absent the creator God there can be no reason, or logic.

Is it there any other kind of god? I have no proof of the opposite, perhaps you can show me the proof of the existante of another kind of god.

So did Decart, but his 'demonstration' was faulty and indeed lacked of logic. Obviously, that is the same case for yours, if you have any.

You can try to demonstrate that  absent the creator God there can be no reason, or logic, but i just won't discuss it or listen to it, what would be the point? It's just crystal clear that your demonstration will be faulty. No one has ever demonstrated such a thing and it looks like we'll have to wait a little bit more (maybe forever) until someone demonstrates if god does or not indeed exist.

Meanwhile, i will suppose as a first hypothesis that god doesn't exist, as i do with everything else: as the starting hypothesis, nothing exists, until we have evidence on the contrary.

If i had as the starting hypothesis that anything can exist, i could for example say that, as a first hypothesis, there's a dumbo flying out there around the galaxy, and that's no use to me.

Btw, i don't seek to make you change your mind, i know you won't. Just like i know you are wrong.

Yes and then when faced with evidence that a particular something does exist, if you choose to ignore the evidence then you are free to continue believing it does not.  Quite a convenient approach.

The case is that there's no evidence that god exists.

If we choose now the hypothesis that says god exists, we should also choose the hypothesis that states there's a dumbo flying all around the galaxy.

BTW, i'm not the creationist here, don't tell me about 'ignoring evidence'  ;D

No, sorry, this is the case your presupposition seems to demand you choose.  You pretend that you have no preconceived notions about this world but you only fool the dimwitted.

Hey, it's you who has stated that "I contend that absent the creator God there can be no reason, or logic.", not me. You showed no evidence supporting that affirmation.  Evidently, you showed no evidence because there's not such an evidence. Otherwise, where's the evidence?

I mean, should i suppose, as a first hypothesis, that you have evidence that god indeed exists?  :sleepy:

Yes, but you also consider agnostics atheists too, and you seem to have some problem with truth but I can't put my finger on it just yet.

I'm not sure if you were saying this just to make a point about IamMe's belief that killing is always murder (btw, I disagree with him on that point, murder is a clearly defined legal term) or if it reflects your actual view of things, but I'll respond to this anyway.

The definition of "athiest" is up to interpretation a little, but generally agnostics call themselves agnostics, not athiests for a reason. This is true in my case. I do not believe that there is no "god". I also do not believe that there is a "god".

You got it!


It makes more sense to me tp evaluate ones worldview in order to find out what title fits best.  Here is a test I suggest,

1. Where do you say this universe originated from?  A theist will say it was made by a creative agent. while an atheist will say it was not (most will claim a material cause), and an agnostic will say they don't know.

There are additional relevant questions to confirm the title but you get the idea, I think.

If I had to guess, I would say the "big bang", but I wasn't there, so I can't tell you for certain. I find the supporting evidence more persuasive for a "big bang" than the idea that "god" made it happen. I'll admit though, something from nothing is a little bit of a conundrum, I'm inclined to believe that there never was "nothing". If you classify that "something" as "god" I can relate, but I definitely don't subscribe to most common views of god.

Oh, come now Findeton, you are about to discredit yourself further.  It was you who said you were not interested in that topic further.  Forgive me for taking you at your word.


It would be a respectable thing to do.  I would generally take you at you word at first as I did above, and then if I were interested I might ask about the evidence. 

I am quickly learning more about you though.  It seems your prejudice as already evaluated the evidence and you have no further use for it.  That's fine, you give yourself away and prove you are not the uncommitted person you claim to be.  You are a fraud.  Good evening.

I find the big bang to be quite persuasive as well.  I find it persuasive evidence for a transcending cause  as you also seem to.   When coupled with fine tuning observed in the physical parameters it seems to point to an intentional event caused by an intelligent and very powerful agent.

So you don't shrug and say that you don't know and you don't seem to agree with materialism.  Sounds like a deist to me.

Critical elements of Deist thought included:

    * Rejection of all religions based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God.
Yes      
    * Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious "mysteries".
With the caveat that many unexplained things happen, but we don't understand them. Something isn't a miracle just because we don't understand how it happened.
    * Rejection of the Genesis account of creation and the doctrine of original sin, along with all similar beliefs.
I neither believe in sin, nor take the biblical account of genesis to be literally accurate.
    * Rejection of Judaism, Christianity, Islam and other religious beliefs.
Yes

Constructive elements of Deist thought included:

    * God exists and created the universe.
I definitely wouldn't state it this way. Somehow the universe being created seems like a faulty idea. To create the universe would be to bring something from nothing.
    * God wants human beings to behave morally.
Definitely not. An entity concerned with regulating the space time continuum and presiding over sub-atomic processes does not care in any fashion, even remotely, if we don't pay our parking tickets, steal candy from little kids or even murder people.
    * Human beings have souls that survive death; that is, there is an afterlife.
No, the afterlife I believe in is the legacy you leave. The Egyptian pharaohs were successful in their quest for immortality. People still speak their names thousands of years later. The most plausible idea to me is that the energy that is our life dissipates and changes form when we die. 
    * In the afterlife, God will reward moral behavior and punish immoral behavior.
Not at all.