User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:20:05 AM EDT
[#1]
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't.  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:21:58 AM EDT
[#2]
The constitution circa 1788 would do just fine.
There are reasons the founding fathers did not use the Bible wholesale. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:22:27 AM EDT
[#3]
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:22:51 AM EDT
[#4]
Quoted: Would sodomy and eating shellfish be felonies?
Only when done at the same time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:23:42 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Quoted: Would sodomy and eating shellfish be felonies?
Only when done at the same time. ...while putting a goose's head in a drawer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:24:01 AM EDT
[#6]
Just so you know, I voted No. But you probably knew that
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:24:22 AM EDT
[#7]
Quoted: You are being arrested for political speech intended to undermine the Motherland. Off to the Gulag for your trial. Your execution has been scheduled for next Monday.Quoted: Quoted: No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:25:02 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
You are being arrested for political speech intended to undermine the Motherland. Off to the Gulag for your trial. Your execution has been scheduled for next Monday.
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. Story of my life. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:25:59 AM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. so please enlighten us. Tell us why those old testament laws are no longer needed but other old testament laws are. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:30:18 AM EDT
[#10]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. so please enlighten us. Tell us why those old testament laws are no longer needed but other old testament laws are. I'll summarize. The Law of the OT was superceded by the Gospel Law of the NT. That doesn't mean that the principles of the OT went away. It means that instead of temporal(physical) punishments the consequences will largely be spiritual in nature. So adultery for example is still against God's law, but there is no longer a need to kill the adulterers for The Law's sake, because God will handle the spiritual consequences. Of course, that doesn't prevent secular law from handling the matter as is deemed appropriate. It just means that a physical death penalty is no longer the prescribed religious consequence for adultery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:30:53 AM EDT
[#11]
I think it is funny that there are actually non-Christians that "think" Christians want to use the Bible as the only source of civil and criminal law.
It just shows how little you really understand about us. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:32:26 AM EDT
[#12]
HELL YEAH! The bible is filled with all sorts of GREAT laws we could use... "Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34) "But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21) If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. –– Deuteronomy 21:18-21 "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9) "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18) "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45) "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27) "do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19) "They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11) |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:34:10 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
HELL YEAH!
The bible is filled with all sorts of GREAT laws we could use... "Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34) "But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.
–– Deuteronomy 21:18-21 "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9) "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)
"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27)
"do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)
"They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11)
Somebody posted without reading my explanation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:34:22 AM EDT
[#14]
I'm a Christian and a Peacher with a BA in Bible, an MA in Bile and an MDiv in Bible and I say "NO!"
The Bible includes Civil, Moral and Ceremonial Law. Enforcing the Moral and Ceremonial Law would be a nightmare. Even if we excluded the moral and ceremonial laws, I'd still say "no." The book of Exodus was the law given to the Israelites while they were traveling in the wilderness. Deuteronomy (which means 2nd law) was given just prior to occupying the promised land. God recognized that the laws they had for wandering in the wilderness weren't suited for people farming and living in towns and cities. If they needed different laws after just 40 years, obviously we need different laws now. mhoffman's example of traffic laws is as good as any. I do think the principles set out in the OT would provide an excellent basis for Civil Law. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:35:59 AM EDT
[#15]
Quoted: Christian Sharia. Interesting idea. A bad idea, but interesting nonetheless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:36:50 AM EDT
[#16]
No, of course not.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:37:29 AM EDT
[#17]
Hell no.
If you think we have trouble with idiots and asshat politicians misinterpreting the meaning of "well regulated" in the Second Amendment, and smugly arguing the definition of the word "is", just wait until you see what they would do with Leviticus and Revelations. Just look at some of the doctrinal pissing matches we have on this site as a very TAME example of what politics would be. ETA. yes I know that the Levitical law was fulfilled by the higher law of Christ... but that wouldn't keep somebody from trying to use it to enact policy. Since when have facts stood in the way of any lawmaker? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:37:39 AM EDT
[#18]
No.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:38:00 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
I think it is funny that there are actually non-Christians that "think" Christians want to use the Bible as the only source of civil and criminal law. It just shows how little you really understand about us.
+1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:38:02 AM EDT
[#20]
I voted no but it sure is a good start...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:38:04 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. so please enlighten us. Tell us why those old testament laws are no longer needed but other old testament laws are. Any time you have to resort of a leftist Liberal's hogwash speech to support your position, you are in trouble.
The Old Testament had laws that were given to the nation of Israel for that time and place. It is also important to understand that Israel was under a Theocracy at the time, i.e., God was the only Ruler. But in the New Testament, we are told that these laws no longer have to be followed. For instance, we have the story of Peter seeing the sheet let down from Heaven with all manner of animals on it and God tells him, "Kill and eat". Peter says, "I'm a good Jew, I can't eat unclean animals." God tells him, "What I have made clean, you can eat." It is a clear instruction that the old dietary laws are no longer in effect for Christians. Most of the other Old Testament laws have also been rescinded, or replaced with other rules. The Bible is a big Book and I don't have time to explain all of it to you. Get one and read it and learn.
And don't get your Theology from a leftist Liberal like Martin Sheen. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:39:42 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
HELL YEAH!
The bible is filled with all sorts of GREAT laws we could use... "Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34) "But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)
If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die.
–– Deuteronomy 21:18-21 "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9) "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18)
"Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45)
"Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27)
"do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19)
"They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11)
When I saw that you had posted, and noticed you put a lot of Bible quotes, I immediately figured it'd be Levitical law taken out of context by someone who has no understanding of what it is. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:41:23 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No, and here's about fifteen good examples of why we shouldn't. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1-ip47WYWcI LOLED An interesting staged hit piece, designed to take Christianity out of context in order to make it look bad. About as productive and honest as putting all atheists in the same camp as godless Stalinist Communists. so please enlighten us. Tell us why those old testament laws are no longer needed but other old testament laws are. Any time you have to resort of a leftist Liberal's hogwash speech to support your position, you are in trouble.
The Old Testament had laws that were given to the nation of Israel for that time and place. It is also important to understand that Israel was under a Theocracy at the time, i.e., God was the only Ruler. But in the New Testament, we are told that these laws no longer have to be followed. For instance, we have the story of Peter seeing the sheet let down from Heaven with all manner of animals on it and God tells him, "Kill and eat". Peter says, "I'm a good Jew, I can't eat unclean animals." God tells him, "What I have made clean, you can eat." It is a clear instruction that the old dietary laws are no longer in effect for Christians. Most of the other Old Testament laws have also been rescinded, or replaced with other rules. The Bible is a big Book and I don't have time to explain all of it to you. Get one and read it and learn.
And don't get your Theology from a leftist Liberal like Martin Sheen.
I think it's more like the sacraments have been fulfilled through Christ. It would be like asking why you no longer have to pay the bank your mortgage payments when it's paid off. Why stop paying the bank? Well...ummm. because that obligation is fulfilled. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:41:46 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted: Quoted: HELL YEAH! The bible is filled with all sorts of GREAT laws we could use... "Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34) "But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21) If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son ... Then shall his father and his mother ... bring him out unto the elders of his city ... And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die. –– Deuteronomy 21:18-21 "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." (Leviticus 20:9) "If a man lies with a woman during her sickness and uncovers her nakedness, he has discovered her flow, and she has uncovered the flow of her blood. Both of them shall be cut off from her people." (Leviticus 20:18) "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property." (Leviticus 25:44-45) "Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard." (Leviticus 19:27) "do not plant your field with two kinds of seed. Do not wear material woven of two kinds of material." (Leviticus 19:19) "They (shellfish) shall be an abomination to you; you shall not eat their flesh, but you shall regard their carcasses as an abomination." (Leviticus 11:11) Somebody posted without reading my explanation. Somebody posted their explination after I hit reply.... And where exactly in the NT does it say to disregard all those OT consequences? (I'm generally curious) I thought the "being ghey is bad" passages were in the OT too? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:42:26 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
Somebody posted without reading my explanation. No, he probably read it. They know the 'west wing' nonsense is just that - but they hate Christianity so passionately that refuting such nonsense a million times won't stop them, or even slow them down, from posting such idiocy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:42:40 AM EDT
[#26]
Hell no.
"But, but, the writers of the CONUS were all Christians and clearly wanted a limited theocracy" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:46:45 AM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Quoted: Somebody posted without reading my explanation. No, he probably read it. They know the 'west wing' nonsense is just that - but they hate Christianity so passionately that refuting such nonsense a million times won't stop them, or even slow them down, from posting such idiocy. Duur, look at the time of posting, 2 minutes apart... took me longer than 2 minutes to find and copy those quotes. Now que the Christianity Persecution Complex... oh wait, you already did, thanks. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:49:41 AM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
What's wrong with using The US Constitution? This. I don't trust the nutcases at the Supreme Court interpreting the Bible for me. They've screwed up the Constitution enough already. And that's not even considering all the self-worshiping socialists in government. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:51:47 AM EDT
[#29]
Quoted: Show me a Theocracy that hasn't had different factions of the same religion fighting among themselves. Or worse yet, blame other religions for what ever problem. What if the KJV/AV 1611 weren't the governing text? That would create one very interesting problem. I'll be charitable and leave it at that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:51:59 AM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
And where exactly in the NT does it say to disregard all those OT consequences? (I'm generally curious) I thought the "being ghey is bad" passages were in the OT too? Read my post above. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:54:27 AM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
I think it is funny that there are actually non-Christians that "think" Christians want to use the Bible as the only source of civil and criminal law. It just shows how little you really understand about us.
I think there are a lot more anti-Christians that just like to use it as a strawman. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:55:36 AM EDT
[#32]
No.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:57:07 AM EDT
[#33]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Somebody posted without reading my explanation. No, he probably read it. They know the 'west wing' nonsense is just that - but they hate Christianity so passionately that refuting such nonsense a million times won't stop them, or even slow them down, from posting such idiocy. Duur, look at the time of posting, 2 minutes apart... took me longer than 2 minutes to find and copy those quotes. Now que the Christianity Persecution Complex... oh wait, you already did, thanks. I don't know - or really care - about the timing of the posts. What I do know is this: That idiotic notion of Christianity and OT ceremonial law being somehow one and the same has been posted, and refuted, an uncountable number of times, yet people STILL drag it up every chance they get. So I don't for one minute believe that you posted that in 'good faith'. Not for a minute. And further, it'll probably be posted here again, in some form, within the next week or two, and probably by someone who read this thread, or even posted in it. Why? Because you hate Christianity. I didn't say you had persecuted me, I didn't say you had persecuted anyone, I didn't say anyone had persecuted me - but you bring it up in a dishonest attempt to deflect from the real issue - you, and others like you, have a passionate, irrational hatred for Christainity. Period. Deal with it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 11:59:07 AM EDT
[#34]
Quoted:
What's wrong with using The US Constitution? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:03:32 PM EDT
[#35]
Quoted:
Um. Since the Bible saying nothing about traffic violations. I'm going to say no. Officer: You ran that red light. Driver: Show me the Bible verse. Officer: um.  Exactly. And let me point out that I am a follower of my Lord and Savior Jesus. However, God also tells us that legalism is basically = death. Laws of man are not the laws of God. However, I think our laws should be guided by the morality that God provides. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:05:14 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
I think it is funny that there are actually non-Christians that "think" Christians want to use the Bible as the only source of civil and criminal law. It just shows how little you really understand about us.
I try not to make blanket statements about this...but I am under the impression that there are some hardcore Christians out there who do want this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:06:11 PM EDT
[#37]
"I like your line of thinking, but would like to suggest another text..."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:06:44 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: I like your line of thinking, but would like to suggest another text... http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v477/DriftPunch/bin-laden.jpg obama grew a beard?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:07:55 PM EDT
[#39]
Not just no, but FUCK NO.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:10:24 PM EDT
[#40]
No. That would be unconstitutional.
Besides, there would be a never-ending debate about which part(s) of which version of the Bible would be authoritative. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:11:19 PM EDT
[#41]
I really really need to stay out of GD.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:14:42 PM EDT
[#42]
If you want morality to return it is the only way. Get God back into the system
It should not be the only source but the guideline for man made laws |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:16:31 PM EDT
[#43]
Quoted:
I am under the impression that there are some hardcore Christians out there who do want this. A very tiny minority who will never get their way because even other Christains would oppose them if they tried to push the agenda. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:19:57 PM EDT
[#44]
Quoted: Quoted: I am under the impression that there are some hardcore Christians out there who do want this. A very tiny minority who will never get their way because even other Christains would oppose them if they tried to push the agenda. I think this poll has proven that. Even though it is a poll on ARFCOMS GD Btw what is a ChristAin? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:27:49 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted:
Quoted:
I think it is funny that there are actually non-Christians that "think" Christians want to use the Bible as the only source of civil and criminal law. It just shows how little you really understand about us.
I try not to make blanket statements about this...but I am under the impression that there are some hardcore Christians out there who do want this. There are 'some' Christians that absolutely want this. I am related to a family of them. Not all do, and I am not generalizing, but to say 'Christians' do not want this, is incorrect. Some do, and vote accordingly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:29:13 PM EDT
[#46]
Quoted: What's wrong with using The US Constitution? |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:33:25 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted: Quoted: What's wrong with using The US Constitution? If the Constitution is the sole authority, there is no ability to establish uniformity in law, when it comes to areas where the Constitution is silent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:34:36 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
I am under the impression that there are some hardcore Christians out there who do want this. A very tiny minority who will never get their way because even other Christains would oppose them if they tried to push the agenda. I think this poll has proven that. Even though it is a poll on ARFCOMS GD Btw what is a ChristAin? My spelling is decent; my typing stinks. Sorry about that. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:34:45 PM EDT
[#49]
Quoted: Because it's a horrendously stupid idea. +1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 12/15/2009 12:35:37 PM EDT
[#50]
Only if some magic dude starts turning my water into wine and teaches me how to pull bread out of me arse.
Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
