Like I said,I’m not sure the intended post ended in the intended place… But having said that and in the spirit of moving ahead, I am interested in your comment, as societies and culture advance, it is obvious that the roman citizenry could have nothing like modern day fire arms… Thus the progression of technology and your quite insightful observation is well taken. But a free people need to have a force, and the individual ownership of firearms makes them a threat to tyranny, and unfortunately for liberals, it is the second amendment that in the end messes up their program.
Do not murder.
Do not bear false witness.
Love your neighbor as yourself.
Love the stranger
If your enemy is hungry give him food and if he is thirsty give him water to drink.
Care for the poor, the sick, the fatherless and the widow
Do not take a bribe.
Do not pervert justice.
Do not oppress a stranger.
Do not hold a grudge or seek vengeance on people.
" The Lord is compassionate and gracious slow to anger and abounding in love."
“The Lord is good to all and His mercy is over all that the has made.”
“The steadfast love of the Lord never ceases, his mercies never come to an end.”
Matt. 15:3 “Why do you also disregard the commandment of God because of your tradition?
Mark 7:9 " You have disregarded the commandments of God to keep the traditions of men.”
" You neglect the more important matters of the Law such as justice, mercy and faith."
Neglect- shirk, evade, abandon,
Disregard- ignore, refuse to obey, pay no attention to
Bob, The Pharisees were not ignorant. They were not fulfilling any of the things I stated above.
Love- to delight in, adore, take pleasure in, admire, show reverence, glorify, enjoy.
Jesus did not hate His enemies or seek to take vengeance on them, but I don’t see Him showing any of these things towards the Pharisees and Sadducees.
“I am interested in your comment, as societies advance, it is obvious that Rome’s citizenry could have nothing like modern day fire arms… Thus in the progression of technology… a free people need to have a force, and the individual ownership of firearms makes them a threat to tyranny.”
Yes, I’d comment that modern tyrants often have powerful technology, and that some individual ‘firearms’ seem unlikely to defeat their powerful armaments. Thus today we need an amendment for the universal right to own nukes to deter tyranny.
Yet I sympathize with how Trump gently praises the love letters and character of many of today’s most tyrannical thugs. After all folk like Kim and Putin also have nukes, and even our superior arsenal has difficulty safely deterring their gulags and tyranny 
LLC, you haven’t challenged my contention. Every scholar who sees the Pharisees as self-righteous religionists who rationalized killing Jesus as a false prophet agrees with you that they deeply violated justice. That does not show that they knew this execution was evil.
Many blind sinners “disregard” what you and I see as obviously plain. That’s why a devout Pharisee, Paul, can say that he was “ignorant” that his slaughter of Christians was not actually righteous.
Second, I argued that Jesus’ confrontations with the Pharisees’ evil, and harshly warning them of its’ consequences can be a sobering expression of love. You rebut that Jesus can’t love them, because agape love requires that Jesus “glorify” them, “admire” them, etc. I don’t know what lexicon suggests that, but it’s nonsense, and strikes me as a sentimentalist weak notion of what agape actually means.
Agape can be tough love. His command “agape your enemies” is not: we love & enjoy what they do.
Bob, it is obvious that the second amendment is a sore spot. Let’s look for example past the Trump administration…The idea that free people will remain free is (as you will have to concede) totally effective only if the populace has a ability to have the right of stating grievance… And that can only be done by a armed people.
Not in my experience. People in my family have the right to state grievances, and none of them are armed. People in many European democracies have stated grievances and changed gov’ts over and over, despite not having an armed people.
Shucks, in Britain even cops seldom are armed. But trust me, their gov’t has plenty of arms to put down a violent internal insurrection, just as the U.S. military will put down any citizens militia here that tries to overthrow our gov’t.
What you may mean is that you feel that your gun is what keeps our gov’t in check, and you secure from tyranny. While I think the president is tempted to expand his powers, I don’t worry about it, nor have any inclination to shoot people over it.
Bob, I believe have. Cunning and ignorant are two different things. If they hadn’t known that His execution was evil they wouldn’t have been plotting and conspiring in secret. If they didn’t know that they weren’t feeding the poor, executing justice taking care of the sick and the widows etc. then the fact that people were starving and sick etc.etc may have been a clue? And if they were ignorant enough to not have noticed this, Jesus informed them. So I’d say they no longer had an excuse at that point.
The Bible tells us to love God, which involves glorifying and admiring. You said the Bible tells us to love our enemies.
I’m lost. You appear to be insisting that we are commanded to glorify evil people?? Yes, Jesus insists, “Love your enemies.” Are you claiming this meant we are required to glorify and admire evil people? Sure, we worship God. What makes you think evil people are to be worshipped like God? Does anyone (you?) seriously believe that is what Jesus’ agape command meant?? I’ve never heard such a definition of it.
You also insist that the Pharisees plotting in secret to have Jesus killed proves they knew it was evil. I find that irrational. The narrative presents Jesus as highly popular with the common people, and the Pharisees as fearful of the pushback they will face if they publicly seek his death. So of course, they strategize behind the scenes, rather than in public. This does not falsify Jesus’ insight that “they know not what they do.”
Do you similarly think that when Paul says he was “ignorant” that murdering Christians was not actually righteous, and that this is why God had mercy on him, that Paul is also deceived about such ignorance?
If you recall, I said loving your enemies means
But, you insisted that I was changing the definition of love. Now you change the definition of love as well. No we are not to love the enemy in the same way we love God. Nor would it be the same love that you would have for a friend or someone you hold close to your heart. Jesus wasn’t washing the Pharisees’ feet.To me it is just an all around general sort of love, whether you call it agape or whatever.
All people are not ignorant. Some know what they’re doing, some may not.Whether or not these Pharisees and Sadducees knew that murder was wrong, or that they were to love others as themselves etc., Jesus educated them on the matter, so they no longer had an excuse. As Hebrews 10:26 says, “For if we willfully sin after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sin.”
You can keep insisting that these Pharisees didn’t know what they were doing. But it doesn’t matter. If one doesn’t know the duties of a man of God or simply refuses to comply then he/she does not qualify for and should not be the head of the church, and this is why they were kicked out.
Well, yes an armed citizenry does indeed help to keep a tyrannical government at bay… Your inclination to say that because we want a right to keep and bear arms that some how people are going to shoot others is a bit over the edge… I know many folks who have firearms and to my understanding, none, none, none, of them have ever used a firearm in a illegal way.
LLC, Heavens, it’s fun to spar with you, but I surely didn’t argue that Pharisees should head the church. Rather that they were deeply deceived and unqualified by the way they read the Levitical law!
I differ that ignorance has to annul the possibility of ministry. Paul confesses that as a Pharisee, he was “ignorant” in believing that his murders of Christians were righteous. But that God had mercy on such ignorance and qualified him to be an apostle of the church.
More central, I agree that love is expressed in differing ways. My objection began when you asserted, "Jesus was not saying to love your enemies.” I cited Matt. 5:43 that He DID say those very words, and spelled out that by agape he meant to seek and do good toward someone (and later added that Jesus never defines it as “admiring” what they do).
If after much objection, you are now agreeing that Jesus WAS saying to “love your enemies,” and in the sense in which he spells it out, I salute you. We agree 
Well, I’m glad your area is so tame. I observe that America’s rate of people shooting others is far higher than other first world nations who have more reasonable restrictions.
Bob, likewise.
Yes, willful disobedience and ignorance are two different things. But neither will permanently disqualify a person from the ministry. What is required, is a return to God, as He says, “Return to me and I will return to you.” The duties of a man of God are not to perform rituals, animal sacrifices, etc.etc. but to be a man of truth just as Moses, the prophets, and Jesus said in the Bible.
Yes.
1 Like
Thanks LLC. I’m glad you are here to challenge views many of us may take for granted. Even when I’m not persuaded, I like your style
Ditto Bob.
The way I see it, loving others as ourselves has always been the way. It was declared in the beginning " So God made man in His own image and said “be fruitful…”. It has been proclaimed throughout all the ages and cannot be changed or altered. Whether we are willfully disobedient or ignorant of it, it’s all the same. This is the portion which “goes through the fire”, meaning failure/ correction, until we learn to follow the one true way. As it is said, this road is wider than the one less traveled, but I believe we will all return to God in the end.
Yes, I too see Love and the Golden Rule as eternally the way, and that this cannot be altered. Though the reason I’m convinced of that is not because it’s written in some external authority that this is the unchanging way. What convinces me more is that I know this (subjectively) deep inside, what some would call the witness of the Spirit, conscience & reason, and so when I read that, I find it true.
Indeed, I’d argue that many Bible passages don’t sound as if this is the way at all, and that the emphasis that everything hangs on the great commandment is much more regular and emphatic in the New Testament, post-Jesus. Where we’ve conflicted is when we argue what specific texts are saying, and you sound as if you’re arguing that the Bible uniformly supports your beliefs and conclusions. Thus it has been helpful to have you acknowledge that you reject what some texts advocate as bogus.
Our take on some particular texts, and the way that you and I select which Biblical texts and ideas are the enduring way may differ. Nonetheless, we appear to often come to the same conclusions about what the main and enduring ideas are.
Bummer… Now that you two are done, I guess I won’t be the owner of the longest forum thread in the history of the internet. Oh well, I almost made it!
1 Like
AG, There’s still a chance.
Bob, Exactly. I’m in complete agreement.
True, and this why we must test every spirit, including words of the Bible. I’d say this is where debate comes into play.
From what I understand, the New Testament writers are claiming that the Lev. law is bogus; that it is not what the fathers Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses the prophets etc. etc. were teaching. Although it does state the essence of the Divine Law, there were many things added to it that are contrary to God, including the worship of pagan gods.
This may be because what they claim to be Moses’ testimony is not really his testimony. Not much is said about Abraham either.
I forgot what the conclusion is…between the LLC and Bob dialogue…if I remember correctly, it’s that the zombies of Z-Hell ( 1, 2, 3)…will be responsible, for most of the problems…I guess I’m pretty good, at taking notes!
So how are these first world nations escaping said gun violence?
First of all, we are not a first world nation as you want to define it… We are not the EU!.. Second is that most all of the citizens of these nations (EU) do not have the rights and liberties of those of us in the United States of America. AND THAT IS A BIG POINT. Third is that most leftist’s will never understand the original founding father’s understanding of the second amendment.
So, my friend, tally aho…