Hate to bust your bubble Funches, but Christianity would be included in the "general" religions as well as any other religion and or belief. So even though Christians have their own forum, we still have the same right to discuss here as you or others do.

No it doesn't. Jesus is the judge of all. When a "judge" carries out a judgment it is far from vigilantism

I have no problem with that...the problem comes when Christians leave their Garden of Eden forum that the Mingle2 Gods have provided for them to frolic in and then come to this forum to ask others not of their belief what their motives are everytime something is posted that they may not agree with.....

which is why if one does not want their belief questioned or possibly place in a negative light or they get easiliy offended... then mingles2 and the church of one's beliefs have provided such gathering places where they can exist in such bliss ...

I ask you to question the faith. No one should take a belief just because. And no one's getting mad or upset lol, we're having a civil discussion. Which is what this particular forum is for. It is a forum so people of ALL beliefs, including Christian can come and discuss there beliefs.

well according to law Jesus just can't declare himself to be a Judge .... as long a Jesus remain within the laws of society then he can do as he pleases...but if his intent is to come back to take the laws in his own hands...then it vigilantism and he's breaking the law

Cowboy...didn't I just express that?

Jesus didn't declare himself the judge. God told us a long time ago that we are judged by the word. The word then was made flesh, Jesus. So the law has and always will be in the hands of Jesus. Still not vigilantism.

you and scripture are trying to do that



God didn't tell us anything ....that's something you read in the bible and the bible is scripture ...another example of you trying to use scripture to promote breaking the law



no the word were made into law books where Jesus has no influence



government has come and full filled the laws of God which means they no longer needed ... didn't Jesus breaking the law what got him nailed to the cross the last time he was here

Everything you have said is only proving my point. There is no point in trying to talk with you or argue with you on anything about Christianity. You don't even understand what you are arguing against well enough for those that support it to have anything to talk to you about. You claim you know what Christians believe and how silly it is when everything you say only highlights your ignorance of the the faith.

The only example I will use here is your last statement. I will not reply anymore as there is no point in it.



government has come and full filled the laws of God which means they no longer needed ... didn't Jesus breaking the law what got him nailed to the cross the last time he was here


Governments laws are often in conflict with God's laws. The most obvious being abortion. So that statement is patently false.

There were governmental laws at the time of Jesus as well. So, government laws didn't come to fulfill anything they were already there and insufficient. "Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's. Render unto God, that which is God's." Why would He say that if there wasn't a governmental law already?

The last half of your statement says He was put to death for breaking the law.

You don't know anything about Christianity or you would know He came to fulfill the law. He was, and still is, the embodiment of the law. It is the people that cannot accept that who put Him to death.

The Roman Empire who was in charge at that time found no fault in Him. Pontius Pilate, the Roman Governor, turned Jesus over to the Jews and told them to do what they will with Him. Pontius Pilate wanted to release Jesus. He was in a difficult position as an unwelcome controlling force. The Jews were ready to riot over this if he would have released Him. He sent word to Rome asking for guidance on what to do. He did not receive a reply before the Jews demanded action. After Jesus was already put to death, word came back from Caesar saying to release Him.






By the way, you are getting upset that Christians are posting here and have no right. You told me to go to my own area and I am not welcome here, but your first post here was a direct attack on Jesus and his followers. What, you want immunity to attack Christians anytime and anyway and Christians have no right to even refute your outlandish and frankly, bizarre claims?

But as I said earlier. There is no point arguing with you as you cannot even accept a very fundamental point of the Christian faith. That is that Jesus died for our sins, went to Hell and conquered death, rose from the dead in His pure Spiritual form (NOT ZOMBIE!!!) and ascended to Heaven. He will come again to fulfill God's laws. NOT man's laws!!!

since God had no problem drowning babies in the Great Flood then why would abortions be a problem?

give it a rest Dr. Phil

Because it's not your place to say who dies, how they die, or when they die. That is all in God's hands. God is the decider of when we leave this world.

the Supreme Court has rule that now women gets to decide not your God....

people were not crucified because they were found innocent of a crime which is why Jesus was crucified because he were found guilty of breaking a law ...in the law of the land Jesus was a criminal ...and will once again be deemed a criminal if he shows up here again trying to take the law in his own hands

dying then going to hell then rising from the dead is exactly what a Zombie does....a pure spiritual form is the same as a ghost and a ghost entering into a dead body and rising is a zombie, Zombieism also has roots in Christianity ....so why is it so hard to imagine that Jesus was a Zombie

But is it not cruel and beneath a loving God to do something like that?

Why would it be? God chose when we were created, why could he not choose when we leave this world?

Because it would be killing another being without reason!

Not necessarily. It's not killing anyone. God doesn't kill anything. He is the decider of when we leave.

Two definitions of killing
1. # an event that causes someone to die
2. # the act of terminating a life

God is not an event, nor do we know if he terminated a life. Life doesn't stop on earth when someone passes away. Their life becomes dormant yes, but is not ended. And besides that, how do you know there's no reason?

Questions relative to the condemnation, explanation or vindication of God for the permission, creation or toleration of evil in the world are not ones that can arise beyond mere speculation. Man is not purview to a perspective of the eternal and can only grasp in a sense so abstract as to be near useless in debate. Either evil exists for a reason that we do not at present understand or it exists in spite of God. Sans the eternal we do not have any way to determine which it may be, rendering debate of the matter moot. At day's end it comes down to what you as an individual are willing to believe, which kind of goes for most everything about religious questions on the divine.

The original intention of this thread was not to introduce rampant speculation about the nature of either God or evil. Theodicy is a consideration that would be more appropriate to a Christian forum, where a constellation of basic assumptions about creation, God and evil can be taken as a given and thus provide common ground for debate. Likewise the vindication of man for actions done at the bequest of God is equally a digression. That vindication is between man and God, the rest of us don't enter into the equation.

The notion was rather more to the point of considering man's justification of actions done at the bequest of God to society. The ancients were possessing of the same caliber of intellect as is found today. So, it stands to reason that most people contemporary with events of Scriptures would be inclined to the same measure of suspicion to someone like say Gideon stumbling out the desert with a tale of divine mandate and a call to arms.

The Book of Joshua poses an even more daunting problem. Consider the Israelite infantry marching into battle to claim the Promised Land. Not being privy to conversations between God and Joshua reduces his actions to nothing short of genocide. Certes, the prophet may tell him "God wills it" as was the custom among later crusaders, but one has to wonder how such a man sleeps at night. Despite opinions to the contrary, violence is not natural to the human condition. We are not predators by nature, but only took to predation out of necessity. Result, people are not like cats and vaguely sociopathic from the womb, but rather experience such activities as traumatic events.

A vindication in Scripture for vigilantism, or more specifically committing acts of violence at the bequest of God and not necessarily from the support of the state, is one way to sooth the conscience in dealing with this breed of trauma, which is part of why I pitched it out there in the first place. Curiosities stems not so much from the question of religious belief as the question of how those beliefs affect people.