(Ron) Off topic question

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

>TILL

>I'll respond to this now.  As I have shown many times on the list, the 

NT,

>especially the writings of the apostle Paul and the epistle to the 

Hebrews,

>teach dispensationalism.  Therefore, since something (like the stoning 

of

>adulterers) was commanded under the OT, Christians cannot be accused of

>hypocrisy for not stoning adulterers today, because this commandment 

was

>not

>included under the new covenant.  Nevertheless, Christians aren't 

entirely

>out of the woods when they point out that death was decreed for 

adulterers

>and other offenders only in the OT, because their god is the god who 

gave

>those commandments.  Thus, they have the burden of trying to explain 

why an

>omnibenevolent deity would have ever decreed the death penalty for such

>offenses as adultery in the first place.

>

>I hope that Matt will post this problem on his web page too.

>

>Farrell Till

>Skepticism, Inc.

>jftill@midwest.net

>


RON
  In a state of war (martial law) penalties for certain crimes and 
indeed what constitutes a crime differ. This is true of God's laws too. 
Adulterers still may be deserving of death, but God has dispensed us 
from this penalty in the hopes that the sinner would repent. For his own 
reasons God felt that adultery among many other crimes should be 
punishable by death in OT times. Perhaps this was due to the fact that 
the Israelites were under constant state of seige and warfare and such 
disruptions would have threatened the efficiency and security of the 
Jewish nation.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

• Previous message: Polytheism remained
• Next message: (Ron) Off topic question
• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]