No, a judgement is not murder. If a judgement was murder, there would be no such thing as the death penalty. For if a judge sentenced someone to death, the judge and the executioner(s) would then also have to be sentenced with murder.

That is why we are not to murder, for Jesus is the judge, not us.

any intentional or unintentional taking of a life is a killing/murder, a judge and/or an excutioner would be guilty of a conspiracy to kill/murder

if Jesus comes to judge and it results in killings/murders then he can be prosecuted under The Partriot Act

just because one is an alien or a supernatural entity does not mean they are exempt from the laws

can anyone point me to where I can find a definition of murder that is synonymous to kill?


cowboy, in the bible it says there is a time to KILL
it also says thou shalt not MURDER


,,they are two different definitions,,, one involving the law and one involving whether a life is taken

Faith

Murder - The unlawful premeditated killing of one human being by another.

So, no you are incorrect. A "judgement" would not be unlawful, it would be an eforcement of the law.

well in case no one told you, the last time Jesus made A "judgement" it was unlawful and got him The Death Penalty ...

It wasn't unlawful. They just did not believe him to be whom he was.

you don't get the Death Penalty for following the law ..which means that Jesus was breaking it

When did Jesus kill someone else that made him a victim to the "law" for murdering someone else?

Jesus faced the Death Penalty for proclaiming he was the "Son of God" himself. Even today, if someone went around preaching that and only through stories did you hear of his "miracles" you'd also be outraged IF you were a devout believer. It is deemed "Blasphemous".

That said.

Judgment has two meanings.
You both just argued two different aspects of it.

The "Judgment" in which everyone is to be judged, burned, or ascend, etc; via final judgment; in some aspects, considered like a verdict a "judge" makes, however, they don't call it a "judgment" they call it, like I said, a "Verdict".

The second judgment, is a personal aspect or view on any given situation.

I will use my better "judgment" to decide what to wear to my interview today.

Funches used the second, from what I perceived, when he compared such to Jesus. This type of judgment isn't against any law and, on the same stone, doesn't cause any physical or mental harm to anyone.

Cowboy was referring to the second type of Judgment. The end of days, the "Final" Judgment. The one in which there is no 'return from'.

Murder. To kill someone unlawfully and with premeditation.
Murder is to PLAN and KILL.

Kill. To cause the death of (something or one).
Murder is NOT the same as KILL.

If you plan and plot out how to kill someone; MURDER.
If you accidentally run someone over with you car; KILL.

MAJOR DIFFERENCE:

To murder someone is to PLAN in.
To kill someone is to ACCIDENTALLY have it happen.
To kill you can also do it for other means; like animals kill to eat; animals don't "murder" each other.

Yes, you do.

To say it's not possible is very dense of you.

perhaps you're dense to the conversation

no one on Death Row is ever charged with "following the law" ....

There has been over 57 cases in the USA alone in which:

"An innocent man has been "convicted" as "guilty" and AFTER the Death Penalty was enacted; the accused was found innocent.

So, no, you are the dense one my friend.

Happens everyday.

Guilty until proven innocent.

did Jesus get crucify in the USA ...if not then why bring it up

but anyway...again you are not trying to comprehend the conversation

"following the law" is not a charge that the State levee against someone or charge someone with

His location is irrelevant.
As is your argument against it.

Either way, yes, you can follow the law, and yes you can still be given the Death Penalty for it.

Pontius Pilot was quoted Biblically saying:

"He's done nothing wrong, why do you wish me to crucify him for this?"

The mob screamed and got angrier, but regardless, Pontius, originally, saw no true reason, purpose, or defiance/breaking of the law that "demanded" Jesus to be crucified.

So, again, it is now it was then, and it always will be a situation and/or possibility in which an innocent man can be found not only just guilty, but condemned to death and, he himself, never once broke a law.

So, why bring it up? Because it's entirely relevant and still happens even in a society where law itself has a more solid foundation then it did 2,000 some years ago. That's why.

jeez...

you can't receive the Death Penalty for a charge of "following the law"...you have to be charged with something that "is against the law"

FOR EXAMPLE:
if jesus claim to be god or king or above the law or whatever...there were a host of things he could have been charged with and received the Death Penalty ...but "following the law" is not something that the State will charge you with


please say that you understand

"Jesus has done nothing wrong! You wish me to condemn someone to die when they've broken no laws?!"

I understand what you are saying.
However.

You are making it that "Jesus BROKE" the law and was charged for it.
The fabrication was created that he "did this which is against the law" was what he was actually charged for.

So, in your way of "proclaiming it", creating a "false" law is the same as breaking a law already "stated"?

Not to mention.

What he was actually "tried" and "convicted" for; weren't "against" any laws that existed. So, your actual defense is a moot point.

Which, again, is my point.

He was convicted for "ghost laws" invented after the fact.

So, he literally was "convicted" for obeying the law, jeez.

..and again, you can be trailed for "following" the law but it goes in accordance with "taking it too far".

So, again, plz, make a point.

if there were even a hint that Jesus claimed to be God...then he broke Roman law since Ceasar was God...he also broke Jewish law

lots of things that guy was guilty of ...but at least he got to eat a Last Supper

Jesus wasn't Roman.

Caesar wasn't Jewish.

..furthermore..

Jesus never "claimed" to be "God". Period.
Not a law to proclaim to be the "Son of".

Point in fact.

I feel like I'm watching a tennis match.


Just sayin...