I don't believe the NT teaches such a thing (which is why I don't believe that Christians ought to push for such a position). The challenge I have, is understanding why. I realize that Jesus came to fulfill the Law, and it changed things dramatically. But I don't get how to avoid the seeming inconsistency of relative truth (it used to be moral to execute homosexuals and now it isn't).cslewislover wrote:What versus would you cite for the abortion aspect?For Christians, God is always the central authority. His law supersedes that of man's. Abortion is an example.
I don't know why you're arguing with Bav the way you are. You seem to turn things around much. You claim that you believe God's morals aren't relative. Bav does too.
So? The concept of Justice I think is a moral. How we get justice is something different. Judgment and punishment are in God's hands, ultimately; they are a means to create justice.
You keep saying that God said to kill homosexuals, but that's not the end of the story. We are not to do that anymore, under the new covenant, and in different places. You are making an argument where there isn't one, and we keep explaining why but you don't want to accept it. It seems pretty clear to most Christians who read the bible, as I cited the Sermon on the Mount, that we are to love our neighbors, not judge and kill them, in the Church era.
Why don't you point out how/why, in the New Testament, you see that we Christians are to kill homosexuals?
I realize you argued against punishments having moral values...but you did admit that shooting a child for stealing a lollipop is wrong (immoral). So that seems inconsistent...either punishments have moral values or they do not.
If they do...and executing homosexuals USED to be moral but it isn't any more...then how is it not the case that the value on this punishment is relative (to time, persons, circumstance)?