• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Genuine Christians and Jesus for Death Penalty

Vincent

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
27
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
It has come to my attention that a faction of Christians believe that Jesus did not support the death penalty. I have decided to adress this confused issue.

By the way, I am not debeating whether you or I believe in the death penalty for killers, but whether the Bible endorses it.


Some oppose the death penalty on practical grounds, arguing that it is not a deterrent. In countries like Saudi Arabia, which enforce a swift and certain death penalty, violent crime is rare. Singapore and Los Angeles have equivalent populations, yet in one year Singapore had 58 murders (most followed by swift execution) while Los Angeles had 1,063. Criminal sub-cultures like the Mafia show that the death penalty is a powerful deterrent even among career criminals, since few will ever double-cross their superiors, fearing the repercussions.





Moreover you shall take no ransom for the life of a murderer who is guilty of death, but he shall surely be put to death. (Numbers 35:31)

Paul recognized the justice of the death penalty. When he was brought before the judgment seat of Festus, he said, “For if I be an offender, or have committed any thing worthy of death, I refuse not to die” (Ac.25:11). By this, Paul admitted that there were offenses worthy of death and that the government had the right to administer death in those cases.

“But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil” (Rom.13:4). The powers that be bear the sword to execute wrath on those that do evil. What do you think these powers are going to do with the sword? Are they going to slap someone on the wrist with it? No. They are going to “execute wrath” by executing someone. They are going to administer the death penalty.

God Himself established the death penalty long before the law was given to Moses. He told Noah, “And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man” (Gen.9:5). This command has never been repealed. Not by the New Testament. Not by Paul. Not by Jesus Himself.

Apparently some Christians do not realize that Jesus and Jehovah are one and the same. Jesus was not a prophet with new insights for living, He was God in the flesh--the same God who gave us the Ten Commandments, and who said, "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man" (Genesis 9:6).

This is not to be confused with the 6th commandment, which in the King James Version reads, "Thou shalt not kill." The proper translation of the Hebrew word is found in the New King James Version, which reads, "You shall not murder." Once again, a distinction needs to be made between "kill," "murder," and "execute," three very different terms.

There is a further problem with the understanding of the word, "forgiveness." Forgiveness means to "cease to feel resentment against." Forgiveness includes pardon for offenses, but I don't think that this is what Jesus intended. Instead, we are to cease to feel resentment against our offenders (hate the sin, not the sinner), but we are not to pardon, that is, to
release them from the legal penalties.

Some people say Jesus' teachings of love and forgiveness require us to abolish the death penalty. But do they really? If we followed this particular argument to its logical end, we would have to do away with all punishment. But no one suggests we should do that. The alternative is always life in prison, but should we put murderers in prison for the rest of their lives? "But Jesus would forgive." Should we put them in prison for twenty years? "But Jesus would forgive." Should we put them in prison for a week? "But Jesus would forgive." The problem comes from applying interpersonal matters with matters between citizen and state.


By the way, everyone screams, "WHAT ABOUT THE WOMAN CAUGHT IN ADULTERY?!" This is my answer. It was a trick question meant by the pharisees to hurt Jesus. If he told them to execute her, he would be a cruel person. If he let her go, he would break the law. So he stooped, and wrote something on the ground. We are not told what. They asked him what he meant. He said let the guiltless one throw the first rock, because if you have looked on a woman and lusted after her, you have committed adultery with her already in your heart. He shamed them into letting her go, because the law said both the man and woman in adultery should be killed. He did not accuse, because that was not his job at that coming. She had no accusers, no one to have her executed. So he let her go.

And that vengeance its the lords means person to person, not person to government.

Let grace be shown to the wicked, yet he will not learn righteousness... Isa. 26:10

Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets... Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great..." Mat. 5:17-19

The problem has nothing to do with the clarity of scripture. It has everything to do with the carnal preconceptions of man. Man wants a toothless Jesus. He wants the Jesus who suffers the little children to come but he rejects the Jesus who runs the moneychangers out of the temple with a whip. He wants a Jesus who will smile on his fornication and adultery, on his dishonesty and hypocrisy, with a boys-will-be-boys look. He does not want the Jesus who called the Pharisees a bunch of ugly names (see Matthew 23) or the One who talked about hell more than He talked about heaven.

Jesus believed in the death penalty. It was established by God, codified by the law, supported by Jesus Himself and sustained by the Apostle Paul. Theologians have no biblical evidence against it. They only have their perception of another Jesus. May we never follow that other Jesus but ever remain faithful to the Jesus of the Holy Bible.

Let grace be shown to the wicked, yet he will not learn righteousness... Isa. 26:10


I hope this writing helps clarify the issue of Jesus and the death penalty.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I do not think any of the fakers will bother even reading those verses or they will try to spin or try to discredit the verses.Most of the anti-death penalty fake christians are the same people who support gay marriage and abortions,they are not going to care.God himself could come down here and bitch slap them upside their heads with the bible and they still would try to bastardize,attempt to discredit or blatently misinterpret the bible.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
I do not think any of the fakers will bother even reading those verses or they will try to spin or try to discredit the verses.Most of the anti-death penalty fake christians are the same people who support gay marriage and abortions,they are not going to care.God himself could come down here and bitch slap them upside their heads with the bible and they still would try to bastardize,attempt to discredit or blatently misinterpret the bible.
Well, since you brought it up, why doesn't this God character realize that people, reasonably, don't want believe that he exists based purely on the words of a book? Why hasn't he come down here and shown me that he exists? Oh, and, obviously people are going to discredit the verses if they feel the verses are either invalid or they feel the whole bible is just an opinion.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Judge said:
This is not to be confused with the 6th commandment, which in the King James Version reads, "Thou shalt not kill." The proper translation of the Hebrew word is found in the New King James Version, which reads, "You shall not murder." Once again, a distinction needs to be made between "kill," "murder," and "execute," three very different terms.

There is a further problem with the understanding of the word, "forgiveness." Forgiveness means to "cease to feel resentment against." Forgiveness includes pardon for offenses, but I don't think that this is what Jesus intended. Instead, we are to cease to feel resentment against our offenders (hate the sin, not the sinner), but we are not to pardon, that is, to
release them from the legal penalties.
First, who are you to say which is the proper translation of the Bible? Second, none of your quotes feature Jesus speaking. Third, please, we don't need fundy judges.
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
jamesrage said:
I do not think any of the fakers will bother even reading those verses or they will try to spin or try to discredit the verses.Most of the anti-death penalty fake christians are the same people who support gay marriage and abortions,they are not going to care.God himself could come down here and bitch slap them upside their heads with the bible and they still would try to bastardize,attempt to discredit or blatently misinterpret the bible.

.....And you wonder why so many decide to leave the church....
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
tecoyah said:
.....And you wonder why so many decide to leave the church....
Religion requires actual commitment.After all the devil beleaves in God.So belief alone is not enough.Many people leave the church because they end realizing they have to do more than just say they beleave.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
First, who are you to say which is the proper translation of the Bible? Second, none of your quotes feature Jesus speaking. Third, please, we don't need fundy judges.
Let me show you what you get with liberal judges.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jan/06010511.html
60 Days for Four Years of Raping Vermont Child

By Hilary White

BURLINGTON, January 5, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - According to a Vermont judge, serious crime should not be subject to punishment. “The one message I want to get through is that anger doesn't solve anything. It just corrodes your soul.” So said Judge Edward Cashman who then gave a 60-day jail sentence to a man who raped a little girl repeatedly for four years starting when the girl – the child of a friend - was six and ending when she was ten.




http://www.missingexploited.com/

Kenneth G. Hinson, a previously convicted rapist, was arrested today on charges of Hinsonwhat else? Rape. He was arrested on charges of assaulting two 17 year old girls. Hinson had been previously convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991. Once again another case of giving the benefit of the doubt to the criminal and endangering the publics safety.

snip...

Like in so many cases we see today, Kenneth G. Hinson was arrested and sent to prison for nine years in 1991 for the rape of a 12 year old girl. The problem being that Hinson was sentenced to 20 years for the crime, yet in 2000 Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham let this predator out of prison and said, “authorities failed to show the man was capable of committing a sexual offense in the future”. Judge Cottingham, what do you think now? Review Committees at the time had requested that Hinson remain in prison and was a risk to society. Yet Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham in his infinite wisdom allowed this animal back on the streets to prey on innocent girls. This is just the latest in a long line of judges that need to be shown the door as they do not have the publics safety or interest at heart.



http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/03/1078295456097.html?from=storyrhs
Child rapist denies kidnap, murder charges

March 4, 2004


Convicted child rapist Marc Dutroux denied kidnapping and killing two young girls found buried in his garden, saying he kept them in a dungeon to protect them from a child sex ring.

The Belgian took the stand yesterday on the third day of his trial for a string of gruesome paedophile murders in the mid-1990s that traumatised the nation and discredited its police and judiciary.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
Religion requires actual commitment.After all the devil beleaves in God.So belief alone is not enough.Many people leave the church because they end realizing they have to do more than just say they beleave.
You say that's why they're leaving, but it could just as well be that they realize that they're putting so much faith in a book.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
Let me show you what you get with liberal judges.

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jan/06010511.html
60 Days for Four Years of Raping Vermont Child

By Hilary White

BURLINGTON, January 5, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - According to a Vermont judge, serious crime should not be subject to punishment. “The one message I want to get through is that anger doesn't solve anything. It just corrodes your soul.” So said Judge Edward Cashman who then gave a 60-day jail sentence to a man who raped a little girl repeatedly for four years starting when the girl – the child of a friend - was six and ending when she was ten.




http://www.missingexploited.com/

Kenneth G. Hinson, a previously convicted rapist, was arrested today on charges of Hinsonwhat else? Rape. He was arrested on charges of assaulting two 17 year old girls. Hinson had been previously convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991. Once again another case of giving the benefit of the doubt to the criminal and endangering the publics safety.

snip...

Like in so many cases we see today, Kenneth G. Hinson was arrested and sent to prison for nine years in 1991 for the rape of a 12 year old girl. The problem being that Hinson was sentenced to 20 years for the crime, yet in 2000 Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham let this predator out of prison and said, “authorities failed to show the man was capable of committing a sexual offense in the future”. Judge Cottingham, what do you think now? Review Committees at the time had requested that Hinson remain in prison and was a risk to society. Yet Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham in his infinite wisdom allowed this animal back on the streets to prey on innocent girls. This is just the latest in a long line of judges that need to be shown the door as they do not have the publics safety or interest at heart.



http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/03/03/1078295456097.html?from=storyrhs
Child rapist denies kidnap, murder charges

March 4, 2004


Convicted child rapist Marc Dutroux denied kidnapping and killing two young girls found buried in his garden, saying he kept them in a dungeon to protect them from a child sex ring.

The Belgian took the stand yesterday on the third day of his trial for a string of gruesome paedophile murders in the mid-1990s that traumatised the nation and discredited its police and judiciary.
First of all, your third example is not even in this country. Second, you've provided just 2 examples of judges make errors in judgement. Anyways, you haven't explain why a fundy judge would be a good thing. Would you not agree that the best possible judge would be a compromise between the two extremes, a centrist?
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,784
Reaction score
3,419
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
jamesrage said:
Religion requires actual commitment.
I agree...though the version of Commitment I use....might be somewhat different than your own.


In some situations at least.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
First of all, your third example is not even in this country.
Still an example of a liberal judge.

Second, you've provided just 2 examples of judges make errors in judgement.
Errors in judgement?That same vermont liberal judges revised the sentence and only gave the child rapist 3 years.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ve...vt_judge_revises_sentence_for_child_molester/


Anyways, you haven't explain why a fundy judge would be a good thing.
When liberal judges give slaps on the wrist to child molesters I do not want any liberals judges to be on any bench,I do not even want any moderates who might run the risk over ruling just like these liberal judges.
Would you not agree that the best possible judge would be a compromise between the two extremes, a centrist?
No.I do not want a fence sitter judge.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
Errors in judgement?That same vermont liberal judges revised the sentence and only gave the child rapist 3 years.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/ve...vt_judge_revises_sentence_for_child_molester/
Correction, it was the same judge. It wasn't multiple judges. Also, while I don't agree with the shortness of the sentence, I do believe he had a valid point when he wanted the rapist to be able to undergo treatment. But, anyways, I love my state.

jamesrage said:
When liberal judges give slaps on the wrist to child molesters I do not want any liberals judges to be on any bench,I do not even want any moderates who might run the risk over ruling just like these liberal judges.

No.I do not want a fence sitter judge.
So, do you want a Bible literalist judge that bans homosexuality and other "moral" stuff like that? Should we stone women to death for certain crimes?
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
Correction, it was the same judge. It wasn't multiple judges. Also, while I don't agree with the shortness of the sentence, I do believe he had a valid point when he wanted the rapist to be able to undergo treatment. But, anyways, I love my state.
Valid?You call disreguarding the little girl that was raped for four years a valid point?Most rapist get more time behind bars just for that one time they raped a woman.The guy the judged gave a slap on the wrist to raped a little girl for four years.That means there was the possibility that little girl was raped 1460 times which is every day for four years.That judge should the thrown out and incarcerated for giving such a horseshit sentence to child rapist.

So, do you want a Bible literalist judge that bans homosexuality and other "moral" stuff like that? Should we stone women to death for certain crimes?
You liberals have a pretty absurd idea as to what a christian fundalmentailist is.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
Valid?You call disreguarding the little girl that was raped for four years a valid point?Most rapist get more time behind bars just for that one time they raped a woman.The guy the judged gave a slap on the wrist to raped a little girl for four years.That means there was the possibility that little girl was raped 1460 times which is every day for four years.That judge should the thrown out and incarcerated for giving such a horseshit sentence to child rapist.
I specifically said I didn't agree with the sentence, dumbass. I said that I agree'd that the rapist should get treatment. Also, you have no proof that the rapist raped the girl 1460 times, so you can save your sophistry.

jamesrage said:
You liberals have a pretty absurd idea as to what a christian fundalmentailist is.
Well, I did phrase it in the form of the question. Would you support a judge that supported those things? Certainly a Bible literalist wouldn't support homosexuality.
 

Vincent

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
27
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
afr0byte said:
First, who are you to say which is the proper translation of the Bible? Second, none of your quotes feature Jesus speaking. Third, please, we don't need fundy judges.
Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets... Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great..." Mat. 5:17-19

The law said to execute murderers.
 

Vincent

Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
140
Reaction score
27
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
afr0byte said:
Well, I did phrase it in the form of the question. Would you support a judge that supported those things? Certainly a Bible literalist wouldn't support homosexuality.
No. A true Bible- obeying Christian Judge would not support homosexuality. Nor let a woman be starved to death with no food or water becuase her 'husband' wanted her to be.

A conservative judge would be good because he would uphold the law, not make his own laws based on his own beliefs.

By the way, we are perfectly fare to homosexuals. They can marry. They can marry adult members of the oppisite sex, just like everyone else. Its called equality, fairness, ect.
Also, when you say homosexuality is fine, what about the other 'diverse' people who pipe up for 'fairness'. "I love my sister!" one man will say. Another, "I love my dog, and he loves me!"
What will you say to them?
And by the way, most gays don't want to marry. That would seriously inhibit thier promicious lifestyle. Most gays just line up to have that way of life recognized as normal, and for benefits.

One last thing, afr0byte, when liberals like you act extremely rude, it gives the left a bad name. And no, I would not stone a woman for adultery. But I would have it as a crime, punishable by law for either a unfaithful huusband or wife. And no stoning for any crimes. Firing squad, letahl injection, something like that.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Judge said:
No. A true Bible- obeying Christian Judge would not support homosexuality. Nor let a woman be starved to death with no food or water becuase her 'husband' wanted her to be.

A conservative judge would be good because he would uphold the law, not make his own laws based on his own beliefs.

By the way, we are perfectly fare to homosexuals. They can marry. They can marry adult members of the oppisite sex, just like everyone else. Its called equality, fairness, ect.
Also, when you say homosexuality is fine, what about the other 'diverse' people who pipe up for 'fairness'. "I love my sister!" one man will say. Another, "I love my dog, and he loves me!"
What will you say to them?
And by the way, most gays don't want to marry. That would seriously inhibit thier promicious lifestyle. Most gays just line up to have that way of life recognized as normal, and for benefits.

One last thing, afr0byte, when liberals like you act extremely rude, it gives the left a bad name. And no, I would not stone a woman for adultery. But I would have it as a crime, punishable by law for either a unfaithful huusband or wife. And no stoning for any crimes. Firing squad, letahl injection, something like that.
It's not equality for homosexuals though, because they can't marry who they love. Also, for the 'diverse' things you mentioned. I don't see homosexuality as being the same thing as beastiality or incest though.

Also, what thing that I said, specifically, was rude? You'd make adultery illegal? Why?
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
I specifically said I didn't agree with the sentence, dumbass. I said that I agree'd that the rapist should get treatment.
The only thing the child rapist should get is punishment not treatment.

Also, you have no proof that the rapist raped the girl 1460 times, so you can save your sophistry.
So how many times do you think that animal raped that little girl in a four year period?

Well, I did phrase it in the form of the question. Would you support a judge that supported those things?
Christians do not stone people. Last time I checked the vatican has not stoned anyone nor have have Jehova witnesses stoned any one nor have any orthadox christians stoned anyone.And those people are fundamentalist.

Yes I would support a judge who opposed homosexual behavior,adultery and many other sins.



Certainly a Bible literalist wouldn't support homosexuality.
Any real jew or real Christian would not support homosexualty,much the same way they would not support adultery,stealing ,murder,worshiping other gods, and so on.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
The only thing the child rapist should get is punishment not treatment.
Right, we wouldn't want to make it less likely that he would commit more crimes when he gets out (again, I'm not saying that he should have only recieved 3 years).

jamesrage said:
So how many times do you think that animal raped that little girl in a four year period?
How would I know? The point is that you can't prove either way. It probably wasn't 1400 times though.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
Right, we wouldn't want to make it less likely that he would commit more crimes when he gets out (again, I'm not saying that he should have only recieved 3 years).
He should never get out for such a crime or he should be executed for it.


How would I know? The point is that you can't prove either way. It probably wasn't 1400 times though.
But we do know that the little girl was repeatedly raped over and over again during that four year period and he only got three years behind bars for it.Rapist who rape adults only once get more time than that piece of ****.
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
He should never get out for such a crime or he should be executed for it.




But we do know that the little girl was repeatedly raped over and over again during that four year period and he only got three years behind bars for it.Rapist who rape adults only once get more time than that piece of ****.
Well, we'll have to disagree about the execution part.

Again, while what the rapist did was obviously very bad, you're using sophistry. She was raped multiple times over the course of 4 years, agreed, but your language is over the top.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
Well, we'll have to disagree about the execution part.

Again, while what the rapist did was obviously very bad,
I would say what the rapist did was horrible or atrocious.Bad just sounds like a word you would to describe what a misbehaved child did.


She was raped multiple times over the course of 4 years, agreed, but your language is over the top..
How is it over the top?
 

afr0byte

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 10, 2006
Messages
2,364
Reaction score
253
Location
A blue state
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
jamesrage said:
I would say what the rapist did was horrible or atrocious.Bad just sounds like a word you would to describe what a misbehaved child did.




How is it over the top?
It makes it sound like the rapist was doing something similar to a gange rape, when we have no evidence of that.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,507
Reaction score
16,299
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
afr0byte said:
It makes it sound like the rapist was doing something similar to a gange rape, when we have no evidence of that.
I never suggested or said anything about gang rape.
 

Ryuken

New member
Joined
Sep 9, 2005
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
Location
Missiouri
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
afr0byte said:
Well, since you brought it up, why doesn't this God character realize that people, reasonably, don't want believe that he exists based purely on the words of a book? Why hasn't he come down here and shown me that he exists? Oh, and, obviously people are going to discredit the verses if they feel the verses are either invalid or they feel the whole bible is just an opinion.
Ask anyone whos had a miracle happen to them after they prayed. Coincidence? No. But since your one of those anti-God people you wouldnt know. He doesnt take a physical form, but hes here, and helps people when they pray.
 
Top Bottom