But why isn't the execution of homosexuals 'New Testament biblical'? How is he wrong?The Bible does not mention guns.
Also, dude's a nutcase.
Stirring the pot to make what point? Therestharnut of every persuasion, Christian or not.But why isn't the execution of homosexuals 'New Testament biblical'? How is he wrong?
If you think there's a pot to be stirred, kindly identify it. I'm curious what persons who identify as Christian have to say about how he is right or wrong.Stirring the pot to make what point? Therestharnut of every persuasion, Christian or not.
When do we start stoning people for eating shellfish?But why isn't the execution of homosexuals 'New Testament biblical'? How is he wrong?
Last time I checked, the ten commandments were quite clear cut.If you think there's a pot to be stirred, kindly identify it. I'm curious what persons who identify as Christian have to say about how he is right or wrong.
The preacher didn't say 'New Testament biblical'. He said "Biblical".But why isn't the execution of homosexuals 'New Testament biblical'? How is he wrong?
'New Testament' was his claim.Last time I checked, the ten commandments were quite clear cut.
'Here in the New Testament, here in Romans...'He didn't say 'New Testament biblical'. He said "Biblical".
The Old Testament (Bible) tells us that gays shall be killed:
Leviticus 20:13
“If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.”
If you think there's a pot to be stirred, kindly identify it. I'm curious what persons who identify as Christian have to say about how he is right or wrong.
Please show this.He's wrong because there is no scriptural basis for what he is saying.
Please show this.
Show how he is wrong, please. This is something that can be articulated.Show that something isn't in the Bible? How exactly do you want me to do that?
But, as he makes reference to Romans, how is he wrong about Romans?Of course he is wrong, very little in the Bible suggests doing what the subject of the OP is suggesting.
Show how he is wrong, please. This is something that can be articulated.
It's curious to me that there's been several 'nope, not biblical' type answers, but no attempt to show how.
How is he wrong about Romans? Are you unable to articulate this?Again how can I show you something isn't in the Bible?
If you have evidence that it is in the Bible please provide it.
How is he wrong about Romans? Are you unable to articulate this?
But, as he makes reference to Romans, how is he wrong about Romans?
Can you expand on how his interpretation of 'worthy of death' is wrong?Nowhere in Romans does the Bible claim that homosexuals should be put to death.
Yup. His name gets blotted out from the book of lifeYes, he is wrong, and his God will probably send him straight to hell.
His eternal soul probably would have fared better if he had embraced the teachings of Buddha.
Thank you.Arguably, he is using Romans1:18-32 in a manner other than intended.
I guess you could argue 32 is a bit ambiguous on God carrying out that sentence or people of God doing so but there really is no clear text from Romans suggesting people get together, round up those who are homosexual, and execute them.
Most of that text is about the wrath of God, not the wrath of people doing something in God's place.
Can you expand on how his interpretation of 'worthy of death' is wrong?