Tennessee preacher-cop calls for execution of LGBTQ people

[The Mark]

Gonna send the thought police after preachers, now. This is going to be fun to watch.

I think they're more concerned that his views as a preacher might be affecting his fair and just application of the law as Sheriff.

IOW, it's not because he's a preacher, but because he's an officer of the law.

 

[Peter King]

There is no "spoken word police" in The United States. The 1st Amendment makes such a thing illegal.

So death threats by a police officer are legal?

Also, the only reason why I used spoken word police is because of your statement about thought police. If he had only thought about killing gays he would not have been in hot water, hence your claim of thought police is totally inaccurate.

 

[apdst]

So death threats by a police officer are legal?

Also, the only reason why I used spoken word police is because of your statement about thought police. If he had only thought about killing gays he would not have been in hot water, hence your claim of thought police is totally inaccurate.

As long as it isn't directed at a particular person, yes.

People have made these kinds of comments in the past and weren't arrested. The only issue here is "white Christian". When Black Panther Party nutjobs say "kill white babies", or some college professor says white people should be exterminated, no one on the Left gets in an uproar about it.

 

[JustHanging]

Just lent his name to a bunch of people. Maybe he is getting royalties.

A bunch of people believe in an invisible sky daddy. What does that have to do with whether that sky daddy is real or not? Lot's of people believe in Santa, does that make him real?

You are assuming I have one or if I do have one it is what you think it is.

You got me there, sorry. Are you a Christian? A theist?

 

[JustHanging]

And the thing with interpretations of Jesus is that we do not even have scripts written by Jesus himself. This creates even more challenges regarding what Jesus actually said. In philosophy, we have a similar issue with Socrates who did not leave any script behind. Everything we know about Socrates is through other philosophers, like Plato.

Well stated.

But if one accepts that Jesus is god/son of god, and the bible is His word, then it should be coherently written. And it's clearly not, it's full of contradictions and confusion.

 

[JustHanging]

As long as it isn't directed at a particular person, yes.

People have made these kinds of comments in the past and weren't arrested. The only issue here is "white Christian". When Black Panther Party nutjobs say "kill white babies", or some college professor says white people should be exterminated, no one on the Left gets in an uproar about it.

You'll have to show me some instances of black police officers giving sermons encouraging the congregation to "kill white babies!" and it not causing an uproar. On the left, right, or middle.

I'll be interested to see your links. Or are you just making up nonsense as per usual?

 

[JustHanging]

I guess Christians don't follow Jesus because they don't keep kosher.

Nah, I think it's because a lot of people use religion to justify their own immoral behavior.

Trump's behavior is about as diametrically opposed to Jesus' as it's possible to be, his policies are about as diametrically opposed to Jesus' as it's possible to be, yet fundamental and evangelical Christians are Trump's most ardent supporters.

 

[Thoreau72]

Tennessee preacher-cop calls for execution of LGBTQ people - CNN

Authorities in Tennessee are reviewing all pending cases involving a Knox County Sheriff's Office detective after he gave a sermon at his church that called for the government to execute members of the LGBTQ community.

"They are worthy of death," Grayson Fritts said in a June 2 sermon at All Scripture Baptist Church, a small church in Knoxville that he leads.
The church posted the sermon online and then removed it, according to The Washington Post. The video was picked up by the Tennessee Holler, an independent liberal news outlet, and edited into a six-minute clip.


Comments:

This is my first thread, so I hope I have followed all the requirements .

Here is another link with the actual short video that was captured by the Tennessee Holier where you can see this person talking

The Tennessee Holler (@TheTNHoller) | Twitter

I do not now if such words with such passion in this setting (church) seems to be within the protection of the first amendment free speech. I know that there is no free speech protection for inciting violence but I guess there is the issue of if in this case such words are perceived to lead people to imminent violence or not. On the other hand, I did a quick google search and found that in 1951 the Court concluded in Dennis v. United States that a danger need not be so "clear and present" if the ultimate harm was very grave (Dennis v. United States | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute)

One thing is sure... Fundamentalist Christians with his beliefs are closer to the fundamentalists Muslims in Brunei in how they want to treat people of different sexualities than close to modern westerners. Heck, even Brunei was forced to back down from the gay sex death sentence after the international criticism they received (Brunei Won't Enforce Death-By-Stoning Law For Gay Sex, Sultan Says : NPR)

If someday in the future we hear about this guy going postal, I will not be surprised.

 

[CLAX1911]

Nah, I think it's because a lot of people use religion to justify their own immoral behavior.

Ding ding ding

Trump's behavior is about as diametrically opposed to Jesus' as it's possible to be, his policies are about as diametrically opposed to Jesus' as it's possible to be, yet fundamental and evangelical Christians are Trump's most ardent supporters.

Good religious people don't want us living in a theocracy.

 

[mrdeltoid]

That's nice. Feel free to disagree with the bible all you want. I know I do, and not just about homosexuality, but also slavery, genocide, etc..

Where did Jesus say homosexuality is OK?

Jesus did say that OT laws still apply, and OT law says to kill homosexuals. Ergo Jesus says Christians should kill homosexuals. Jesus never said it didn't.

The law does still apply. The consequences are different, as Jesus taught. There is nowhere in the bible where Jesus advocates killing anybody for anything. I showed you an example of a broken law in the OT called for stoning. Jesus scolded the people that said she should be stoned. This is why God gave his only begotten son, that we may live. I don't disagree with the scriptures, I understand them, because I studied them. What you just did in your post was twisting the scriptures. Christians follow the teachings of Christ. And Christ never called for the death of gays.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Then they clearly disagree with you, because those sects clearly believe that Jesus does teach exactly that.

You would think an all powerful, all knowing god could manage to write a bit more coherently, wouldn't you?

The scriptures are crystal clear. They disagree with Jesus, not me. Jesus warned about false prophets in the end times. There are many now. There will be more.

 

[JustHanging]

The law does still apply. The consequences are different, as Jesus taught. There is nowhere in the bible where Jesus advocates killing anybody for anything.

Jesus says the OT laws apply. The OT laws say homosexuals should be put to death. What exactly are you confused about?

I showed you an example of a broken law in the OT called for stoning. Jesus scolded the people that said she should be stoned.

I've read the entire bible. I don't remember reading anything where Jesus said people should no longer be put to death. Could you please quote the verse. Thanks in advance.

This is why God gave his only begotten son, that we may live.

God didn't give his only begotten son. What are you talking about? Jesus had the equivalent of a bad weekend, then he ascended to heaven to rule for all eternity. LOL, how is that a bad thing? How is that suffering? How is that god giving anything.

My goodness, the average baby born in a Third World country suffers more than Jesus ever did. "Gave his only begotten son". Pfft. What a bunch of ridiculous nonsense.

I don't disagree with the scriptures, I understand them, because I studied them.

Obviously you do disagree with scripture. Jesus said OT law still applies. OT law says homosexuals should be killed. Therefore Jesus believes homosexuals should be killed. Explain to me what part of that simple logical expression is wrong. (Hint: You can't, it's both valid and sound)

What you just did in your post was twisting the scriptures.

Quoting Jesus and the OT is twisting scripture? Explain please.

Christians follow the teachings of Christ. And Christ never called for the death of gays.

In fact he did, as I clearly demonstrated. Or do you deny logic?

 

[JustHanging]

The scriptures are crystal clear.

Indeed they are.

1. Jesus says OT law still applies:

Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled"

2. OT law says homosexuals must be killed:

Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”


3. Therefore Jesus believes homosexuals must be killed.

Honestly, it's very basic logic. If you don't understand, take a second or third year logic course at University, and you'll understand why I'm correct.

They disagree with Jesus, not me.

LOL, that's exactly what they say about you.

Jesus warned about false prophets in the end times.

He did indeed. You're denying his word, so you are definitely a false prophet. Remind me, what happens to false prophets again....

 

[mrdeltoid]

Indeed they are.

1. Jesus says OT law still applies:

Matthew 5:18: "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled"

2. OT law says homosexuals must be killed:

Leviticus 20:13 “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.”


3. Therefore Jesus believes homosexuals must be killed.

Honestly, it's very basic logic. If you don't understand, take a second or third year logic course at University, and you'll understand why I'm correct.




LOL, that's exactly what they say about you.



He did indeed. You're denying his word, so you are definitely a false prophet. Remind me, what happens to false prophets again....

Your logic is flawed. The law called for the death of homosexuals in the OT. We know that. He said the law still applies. But, he never addressed homosexuality at all. So if that was all we had to go on, one would assume he would want him killed. BUT, there was the example of the woman that committed adultery. In the OT, the law would call for her death. Luckily, Jesus DID address adultery. Like homosexuality, in the OT, it carried the death penalty. But Jesus said "Let he that is without sin cast the first stone." So when it comes to death penalty cases, we found that even though the law was still in effect (against adultery), the penalty was NOT. So logic would suggest, the best way to find out what Jesus feels about death penalty cases, would be to see how he handles a law that carried the same penalty. We saw that, and it wasn't death.

 

[JustHanging]

Your logic is flawed.

This should be good.

The law called for the death of homosexuals in the OT.

Yep.

He said the law still applies.

Yep.

But, he never addressed homosexuality at all.

Jesus said OT laws applied. OT laws says kill homosexuals. Therefore Jesus addressed homosexuality.


Your argument is that Jesus said OT laws still apply, but that Jesus was lying and they really don't. You are accusing Jesus of lying. Dude, that is some serious **** going on right there. Are you sure you want to be doing that?

 

[pamak]

Your logic is flawed. The law called for the death of homosexuals in the OT. We know that. He said the law still applies. But, he never addressed homosexuality at all. So if that was all we had to go on, one would assume he would want him killed. BUT, there was the example of the woman that committed adultery. In the OT, the law would call for her death. Luckily, Jesus DID address adultery. Like homosexuality, in the OT, it carried the death penalty. But Jesus said "Let he that is without sin cast the first stone." So when it comes to death penalty cases, we found that even though the law was still in effect (against adultery), the penalty was NOT. So logic would suggest, the best way to find out what Jesus feels about death penalty cases, would be to see how he handles a law that carried the same penalty. We saw that, and it wasn't death.

And as an atheist I solve the contradiction of the mentioned passages by believing that Jesus talked more like a politician using double talk when he said that the Old Testament law still applied to full extend, "...not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law," probably because even though he disagreed with some aspects of the OT law (death penalty consequences), he did not want to directly challenge at that time the priesthood which was acting as a guardian of the old laws. He wanted to buy time to continue his work and preaching.

By the way, I assume that based on the Bible you see gay sex as a violation of the Christian religious law but you do not endorse the death penalty. Am I right?
If I am, my question is if you believe that there must be some legal consequence by the state against the gays or not.

 

[TrueScotsman]

Your logic is flawed. The law called for the death of homosexuals in the OT. We know that. He said the law still applies. But, he never addressed homosexuality at all. So if that was all we had to go on, one would assume he would want him killed. BUT, there was the example of the woman that committed adultery. In the OT, the law would call for her death. Luckily, Jesus DID address adultery. Like homosexuality, in the OT, it carried the death penalty. But Jesus said "Let he that is without sin cast the first stone." So when it comes to death penalty cases, we found that even though the law was still in effect (against adultery), the penalty was NOT. So logic would suggest, the best way to find out what Jesus feels about death penalty cases, would be to see how he handles a law that carried the same penalty. We saw that, and it wasn't death.

Too bad your logic hinges on a story that is almost universally understood to be an interpolation, a latter addition to the text, placed in the latest and by far most unreliable gospel. None of that registers in the logical formula of fundamentalist thinking.

 

[JustHanging]

And as an atheist I solve the contradiction of the mentioned passages by believing that Jesus talked more like a politician using double talk when he said that the Old Testament law still applied to full extend, "...not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law," probably because even though he disagreed with some aspects of the OT law (death penalty consequences), he did not want to directly challenge at that time the priesthood which was acting as a guardian of the old laws. He wanted to buy time to continue his work and preaching.

By the way, I assume that based on the Bible you see gay sex as a violation of the Christian religious law but you do not endorse the death penalty. Am I right?
If I am, my question is if you believe that there must be some legal consequence by the state against the gays or not.

Cool. So your argument is that Jesus lied. (bolded)

I can agree with that, it would explain the contradictions in the bible.

 

[pamak]

Cool. So your argument is that Jesus lied. (bolded)

I can agree with that, it would explain the contradictions in the bible.

Yep!

Of course, I know that no Christian would agree with me, but it is okay. I do not care if some people believe that Jesus was God as long as such views do not create real life consequences to how consenting adults (gays) act in their bedroom.

 

[mrdeltoid]

And as an atheist I solve the contradiction of the mentioned passages by believing that Jesus talked more like a politician using double talk when he said that the Old Testament law still applied to full extend, "...not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law," probably because even though he disagreed with some aspects of the OT law (death penalty consequences), he did not want to directly challenge at that time the priesthood which was acting as a guardian of the old laws. He wanted to buy time to continue his work and preaching.

By the way, I assume that based on the Bible you see gay sex as a violation of the Christian religious law but you do not endorse the death penalty. Am I right?
If I am, my question is if you believe that there must be some legal consequence by the state against the gays or not.

No I do not believe the state should have any authority at all when it comes to things like that, abortion, adultery, or anything that doesn't harm another human being. I studied the scriptures intensely for several years, searching, trying to understand, and honestly to answer some questions I had. I noticed that the longer I studied it, the more clear it became. I found that there are so many subtle things that link one thing to another, it takes years to get to a point where it all comes together. Remember, Jesus called many of the religious leaders in his day hypocrites.

 

[pamak]

No I do not believe the state should have any authority at all when it comes to things like that, abortion, adultery, or anything that doesn't harm another human being. I studied the scriptures intensely for several years, searching, trying to understand, and honestly to answer some questions I had. I noticed that the longer I studied it, the more clear it became. I found that there are so many subtle things that link one thing to another, it takes years to get to a point where it all comes together. Remember, Jesus called many of the religious leaders in his day hypocrites.

Then, you are the type of Christian whose beliefs do not bother me at all, even if we completely disagree regarding Jesus and the Bible.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Well stated.

But if one accepts that Jesus is god/son of god, and the bible is His word, then it should be coherently written. And it's clearly not, it's full of contradictions and confusion.

If you read the bible with an open mind, and really study it, you will find that there aren't really many, is any contradictions. The problem is that most people don't have the time to invest in such and endeavor. Have you ever saw the contradictions personally, or took the time to research it? You'd be surprised at how clearly it is written.

 

[j-mac]

Considering I didn't mention Nazis, only dehumanization, apparently you sincerely think dehumanization is strictly a Nazi thing.

SMH.

Shake your head indeed.....then what did you mean when you ended that post with: "...and history teaches us what comes next...."???

Sent from my SM-T587P using Tapatalk

 

[mrdeltoid]

Then, you are the type of Christian whose beliefs do not bother me at all, even if we completely disagree regarding Jesus and the Bible.

I enjoy spirited discussion on most things, and sure, we're going to disagree at times, we're human. The way that I read the bible, my primary duty is to love my fellow man. Some time I may not like them much, but I should love them. I don't like, however, when it just degrades into an argument. Sometimes it's hard for me to tell if someone is sincere in their words, or just trying to win an argument. As a matter of fact, I'm not fond of some of the same type of Christians you were probably referring to. lol

 

[mrdeltoid]

Jesus says the OT laws apply. The OT laws say homosexuals should be put to death. What exactly are you confused about?



I've read the entire bible. I don't remember reading anything where Jesus said people should no longer be put to death. Could you please quote the verse. Thanks in advance.



God didn't give his only begotten son. What are you talking about? Jesus had the equivalent of a bad weekend, then he ascended to heaven to rule for all eternity. LOL, how is that a bad thing? How is that suffering? How is that god giving anything.

My goodness, the average baby born in a Third World country suffers more than Jesus ever did. "Gave his only begotten son". Pfft. What a bunch of ridiculous nonsense.




Obviously you do disagree with scripture. Jesus said OT law still applies. OT law says homosexuals should be killed. Therefore Jesus believes homosexuals should be killed. Explain to me what part of that simple logical expression is wrong. (Hint: You can't, it's both valid and sound)



Quoting Jesus and the OT is twisting scripture? Explain please.



In fact he did, as I clearly demonstrated. Or do you deny logic?

I disagree with your inference of Jesus's position on killing gays. So I'll just agree to disagree, hopefully agreeably.eace