Hi StSanta,
Originally posted by StSanta
Well, your place is a just a tad too far away for me to attend. Seriously, if it was close, I would. But I am a northern Yurotard.
Well, I guess come to think of it, I'm a displaced Yurotard myself, at least in the place of origin sense.
I'm sorry you won't be able to make it, recordings of the conference will be available afterwards via the net though, and I'll be willing to discuss the content here.
Right. But since such a killing is endorsed by the authorities, it does not constitute murder. Since it is not murder, is it acceptable? My point being that at some point one has to make a judgement.
Actually, the teaching of the bible is that just because an action carries the imprimatur of a magistrate or a judge, that does not mean that it can't still be an act of murder. For instance, it is clearly taught that the crucifixion of Jesus was in itself "unlawful" and therefore an act of murder. This is reinforced by the description of the Kangaroo court trial in the Sanhedrin and the final decision of Pilate to order Christ put to death even though he had formally declared Him to be innocent of all crimes at least twice. The same is for instance true of King Saul's order to kill the priests in 1 Sam. 22, Jezebel's order to put Naboth to death in 1 Kings 21 and a host of other "unlawful" killings.
The biblical principle (which was also carried over into English common law) was that all authority human authority is derived rather than original. So when a King acts contrary to the moral law, he ceases to be a ruler and becomes instead a tyrant "doing what is right in his own eyes" and usurping an authority he does not have. Judges, and even legislative bodies can do the same thing when they rule contrary to principles of justice.
I agree with the Bible here although I question reasoning. If God looks anything like me, he is an ugly one and that doesn't resonate too well to my perception of 'im.
I take it you're joking here and that you understand what is meant, but I'll go ahead and note that the image of God refers not to physical appearance, but rather to qualities that are not present in anything else in creation, like having an immortal soul and the ability to reason and obey Him. Of course the bible teaches that our resemblence to God was substantially marred by the fall.
The key here is to define unjust. How would you do that? Do the secular laws or laws of other religions matter or is it all in accordance to Biblical new Testament law?
All of the laws in the Bible are intended to be a reflection of the application of God's nature to morals. In a sense therefore when we ask
"What would God's nature (the holiness of God if you will) look like if it was expressed in ethical principles?" we have an answer in the Ten Commandments. God does not steal, murder, lie, etc. Our modern civil laws need not slavishly follow the civil laws of the Old Testament, but they should follow rather than reverse the general tenor of the Ten Commandments. If they do, we can say they are"Just" because they follow an absolute standard for Justice and Mercy. So our laws should go against bribery, partiality in judgement, false witness, and so on.
Most of the world's laws, intentionally or not, follow this principle. Those that don't are at best arbitrary and at worst unjust whether or not men in those countries would agree.
Thanks for taking your time to respond Seagoon. You actually have a pretty good job come to think of it. Sure beats being a cog in the corporate machine, eh?
Well, I can honestly say I love my calling and wouldn't want to be doing anything else. I have worked as the corporate cog, I've even worked in politics, and ultimately I can say that while those jobs were more financially profitable, being a pastor is the most worthwhile thing I have ever done.
Anyway, good "talking" to you (that goes for Vudak and the rest). Do feel free to stop by.
