Apostasy Rising: 4 Denominations In Less Than A Week Defy God's Word

Scripture Bird said:
What does that mean?Per your understanding of the scriptures.
Click to expand...
I was just trying to get Mitspa to see how out of place his comments were and why they didn't make sense.

An eye for an eye means punishment should fit the crime. Some people think it connotes cruel punishment, but actually it is just as much prohibitory of cruel punishment as light punishment. But that is neither here nor there.
 
Yes, as it pertains to seeking revenge it can certainly not be applied, but in rendering objective justice I think that is the correct standard. And that's pretty universal across all cultures. Though I believe restorative justice is better than retributive justice.
 
How do you see one rendering objective justice using the commandment Jesus afforded in the new testimony provided as God's will in Matthew 5:38-50?
 
Scripture Bird said:
How do you see one rendering objective justice using the commandment Jesus afforded in the new testimony provided as God's will in Matthew 5:38-50?
Click to expand...
Well as part of a judicial system to maintain order in society there really is no other way to do it save an eye for an eye. But that is to be adjudicated by a disinterested third party, not as a mark of revenge. However, there is a matter as to if a Christian should go to court and that's tricky. However modern justice requires anyone with a stake recuse themselves from the case which I see as fulfilling these requirements.
 
Would you please elaborate on your meaning when you say, However modern justice requires anyone with a stake recuse themselves from the case.
What is the meaning of 'rescue' in that context?


MMurphy said:
Well as part of a judicial system to maintain order in society there really is no other way to do it save an eye for an eye. But that is to be adjudicated by a disinterested third party, not as a mark of revenge. However, there is a matter as to if a Christian should go to court and that's tricky. However modern justice requires anyone with a stake recuse themselves from the case which I see as fulfilling these requirements.
Click to expand...
 
Scripture Bird said:
Would you please elaborate on your meaning when you say, However modern justice requires anyone with a stake recuse themselves from the case.
What is the meaning of 'rescue' in that context?
Click to expand...

Yes, well in criminal law if a judge or prosecutor knows the defendant they must, by law, recuse (which means resign from the case) themselves so that someone who is impartial can carry out the trial. So the victim of a crime is never required to pass judgment.

Civil cases (like what you see on the People's court) is a little different but I think ultimately if you have discretion it is not violating the commandments.

Also the word is recuse not rescue.
 
Mitspa said:
no the scientist on this video, prove that it defeats the big bag theory...did you even watch this video?
Click to expand...
"The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the early development of the universe.[1] The key idea is that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the universe was denser and hotter in the past. Moreover, the Big Bang model suggests that at some moment all matter in the universe was contained in a single point, which is considered the beginning of the universe."
 
MMurphy said:
Yes, well in criminal law if a judge or prosecutor knows the defendant they must, by law, recuse (which means resign from the case) themselves so that someone who is impartial can carry out the trial. So the victim of a crime is never required to pass judgment.

Civil cases (like what you see on the People's court) is a little different but I think ultimately if you have discretion it is not violating the commandments.

Also the word is recuse not rescue.
Click to expand...
smiley-shocked003.gif
Scripture Bird reading comprehension fail 101! :ROFLMAO:No wonder I needed clarification! Yes, the word is recuse, which I know the definition for. I have no idea why my eyeballs read, rescue.

Thank you. :)
 
MMurphy said:
"The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the early development of the universe.[1] The key idea is that the universe is expanding. Consequently, the universe was denser and hotter in the past. Moreover, the Big Bang model suggests that at some moment all matter in the universe was contained in a single point, which is considered the beginning of the universe."
Click to expand...
Not according to these very elite scientist and just basic common sense.
 
Mitspa said:
Not according to these very elite scientist and just basic common sense.
Click to expand...

Mitspa, that's just not true. There are a few scientists who have alternatives--one in which the universe beats like a heart--but for the most part there has not been a major point of disapproval to the Big Bang theory itself, which once again simply indicates the universe has an origin.
 
MMurphy said:
Mitspa, that's just not true. There are a few scientists who have alternatives--one in which the universe beats like a heart--but for the most part there has not been a major point of disapproval to the Big Bang theory itself, which once again simply indicates the universe has an origin.
Click to expand...
Well Im sorry, if you watch the video you will see the very elite scientist have now renounced this theory and its many impossibilities as just another belief system, not based upon true science but on the imagination of men.
 
Last edited:
Find someone not involved in creationist science and I will. I've heard creationists speak before, and while they present interesting points and I have nothing against people who learn from them, the work that they do is by and large biased and unscientific.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top