So in Brunei men who have gay sex get stoned. Seeing that Leviticus 20:13 tells us faggots should be put to death...

So in Brunei men who have gay sex get stoned. Seeing that Leviticus 20:13 tells us faggots should be put to death, should we as Christians follow along?

Attached: 57210e3c1900002e0056c614.jpeg (878x585, 142.51K)

Other urls found in this thread:

gotquestions.org/stone-rebellious-children.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

Besides, capital punishment is a reserved power only the state has not the citizenry. Vigilante justice always backfires.

You want to start enforcing the whole law? Did Christ die for nothing?

This thread again.jpg

No, we should not follow OT law, we should follow the teachings of Jesus. Who says

Every position besides Christian reconstructionism is totally arbitrary.
Look up Rushdoony.


This argument could be levied against all execution. Should rapists be executed? Should murderers?
If "yes", you're intellectually inconsistent.

Attached: 1549870690640.jpg (1242x1190, 108.23K)

Should drunkards be executed? fornicators?

Early church fathers defended capital punishment and just war theory. Of course that is different from vigilante justice though.

We should be more concerned with saving souls. I'm not sure how much getting involved in executions (no matter how just the cause) helps with that. I'm more comfortable being on the outside of power, rather than recreating Israel. I hold up the first 3 centuries of the church more than any period, when we didn't have power. If anything, we should have the world show it's true colors - and get stoned by them instead.

Yes, i agree with that. But i find the claims of executing homosexuals dubious and erroneous.

RushJewny

The law of God comes from God, not the Jews.

That was not given by God as the punishment for those acts, no.

not an argument


I don't think drunkards ever saw execution
Fornicators yes if they meet the criteria, like the young woman who does report an alleged rape

Why did Rushdoony accept separation of church though? Big oooff moment there.

Right. What about children who dishonor their parents?

a bullet to the head will do

What do you mean

I'm just reading about him online. It says he was pro-separation of church and state, a typical Protestant position.


Also for those who are curious I was just reading Justinian's Code (a saint in EOC) which says those who rape virgins or nuns get the death penalty. Title 13: Concerning the rape of virgins, widows, and nuns.

Attached: 1489605818369.png (335x322, 209.32K)

That's not just a Protestant position. It's the whole early church position, which sadly got hunted down and didn't have any worldly trappings of power to speak of. Justinian is 500 years later. I'm not sure he was great either. He married a monophysite ex-courtesan of a wife, assumed leadership of the church and advocated her positions, and bullied bishops - eventually leading to the premature death of the bishop of Rome, by needlessly tiring the man out. Once Justinian was finished with his bullying, the man died on the ship to his home.

...

I don't think it's accurate to say the early fathers were for the separation of church and state, that's a very new concept in history.

Also what's the point of arguing for capital punishment from the Bible if ultimately we believe in a secular state? If Rushdoony had been for integration of church and state then maybe it would be more convincing.

Actually it doesn't. It is against vigilante justice.

Justice is reserved for the state to enforce. Now if sodomy were still illegal and punishable by death I would support that. Sodomites are a danger to society and especially young children. case in point the kid that is being abused into becomming a tranny and forced to dance at sodomite bars

Unfortunately because we live in the """modern""' world thanks to """some people""" we can't kill them without becoming muslims. We don't have to bring back all the OT laws, just the ones that make sense for a healthy traditional christian society.

Yes, with important caveats.
gotquestions.org/stone-rebellious-children.html
Good discussion of the law although the author doesn't think it still applies.

Wow, nice, quoting half a sentence.

It's still a sin. But Leviticus was law for Jews only, and only between the time of Moses and the Crucifixion. Stick to the New covenant.

Seeing as context is so important to you..

Rushdoony's an idiot which made some retarded dominionist system without precedent in the history of christian states.

Should we let all criminals go free?