'Do evangelicals' actions and belief match Jesus'?

[karl]

Can you actually imagine Jesus water boarding someone?

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

It's interesting that you use the most famous injustice in all of history to defend the death penalty. I would think that this would argue against the death penalty.

The injustice of Jesus punishment was not the extent of His punishment but rather the injustice of His being declared not guilty of crimes He didn't commit and being executed as though He had been guilty of committing them.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

And how do you deal with Jesus' direct command to not follow the principle of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth which is exactly what the death penalty is?

Why the fixation on the death penalty?

[cardw]

When considering the death penalty I consider the cost of even one person unjustly being killed.

One has to make the following value judgement.

Is letting 20 criminals serve life sentences worth the prevention of even one person being put to death unjustly?

We don't have a perfect justice system and with the presence of a death penalty it becomes that much easier to expand its use to any person that state decides is unsavory.

And in your application of Jesus' endorsement of the OT law it is entirely possible that with the religious right in power, the death penalty could be expanded to even trying to convert someone to another religion. It doesn't take long to find some Christian group promoting this.

It worries me that Christianity has become a political force in this country. There is no case in history where religion in power did not become intolerant of competing voices.

Like I said before only religion allows good people to do evil things.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Can you actually imagine Jesus water boarding someone?

The God of the NT is the God of the OT. Everybody who has ever died has had judgment executed against him. Even the people Jesus healed and raised from the dead still died.

So I guess Jesus didn't really mean turn the other cheek, love your enemies, and do good to those that treat you badly.

His sermon on the mount wasn't to be taken literally I guess. It was all symbolic.

Christians really do worship a blood thirsty revengeful god after all.

[karl]

The Bible and SOP are clear that the forbearance of God has its limits.

The time is coming when in their fraud and insolence men and women will reach a point that the Lord will not permit them to pass, and they will learn that there is a limit to the forbearance of Jehovah.... {BLJ 189.4}

[ClubV12]

I will, at the very least, define torture within the same guidelines as the international community defines torture. THAT debate continues, especially as it concerns water boarding.

Violation of those said community standards cannot be justified under any circumstances. Not to save lives, regardless of the number, not even to save the life of my own child. That perspective from a political stand point.

From a spiritual stand point I may define torture in broader terms than the international community and disallow even more of it than they do. As christians we have to follow certain specific "rules", even unto death. Trusting God to work out the problem, as He see's fit, not what we want done. If it means our action or inaction done according to His laws and rules will lead to a massive loss of life, so be it. It is in God's hands.

Easier said than done of course, only He knows how we will fare when faced with such horrific decisions.

Which of God's commandents would you be willing to compromise, to excuse, when faced with a life threatening decision that would demand death or submission, torture or freedom, for yourself or for others? Would you love not your life, or theirs, unto death?

Death, or the possibilty of death, in this world has little meaning, it is not to be feared. But it means EVERYTHING if it leads one to that eternal death. During the dark ages, christian wives would sing to their husbands while they burned at the stake. That is horrifying, and yet, wonderful at the same time!

[CoAspen]

Sounds like you are arguing for a robotic, non emotional, non choice making, lock stepping christian.

Do not be so quick to say what you would do, unless you have walked in those shoes.

[cardw]

Let's consider Jesus at his most punitive in Matthew 25 and what he considers important.

Quote:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Notice the main question isn't whether you believe in the trinity or the Sabbath or the virgin birth or you consider abortion a sin or homosexuality a perversion or the United States a Christian nation. The question above all others that Jesus says is important is how we treated the poor, those in prison, and strangers.

If you consider the United States to be based on Christianity then why don't evangelicals support more programs to aide the poor, rehabilitate those in prison, and welcome those who are immigrants. Obviously when it comes to these issues you would rather define the US as Rome or Caesar.

Instead evangelicals overwhelmingly (80%) support harsher sentencing, the reduction of funds for rehabilitation, the removal of programs designed to help educate, provide healthcare, feed, and train the poor, and favor deporting immigrants even if they are working, paying taxes, and have family born in this country.

Now if the vast wealth of the church was in play to provide these services evangelicals might have a point about government taking on these burdens. Instead the vast majority of the wealth of the church is spent on facilities and internal programs.

To me it's obvious that evangelicals hate the message of Jesus.

[ClubV12]

CoAspen is concerned about the "lock step" question:

Which commandment would you be willing to give up to save the life of your child or family?

Would you support a National Sunday law and quit worshiping on Sabbath to save the life of your child? Would you kill? Would you steal? Would you be willing to torture? If your child were starving, would you offer them human flesh to eat?

The first question, Sunday worship, is not at all hypothetical, it WILL be an issue in the future! And it WILL carry a death sentence if you don't follow it.

I pray the Lord will finish the work in me that I might be "lock step" with Him on the coming issues we will face.

[John317]

Let's consider Jesus at his most punitive in Matthew 25 and what he considers important.

31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

Then the King will say to those on his right, Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.

....Notice the main question isn't whether you believe in the trinity or the Sabbath or the virgin birth or you consider abortion a sin or homosexuality a perversion or the United States a Christian nation. The question above all others that Jesus says is important is how we treated the poor, those in prison, and strangers.

It's true that those things are essential in the gospel of Christ. But this is why it's always a good thing to consider everything Jesus taught. Jesus was not saying that belief in Him and acceptance of Him as Lord and Savior was unessential. Jesus inspired both the Hebrew prophets and the apostles to write what they did, and therefore it is contary to the message of the Bible to draw a divide between Christ's words and the rest of the Bible.

Here are other things Jesus Himself taught:

John 3:16

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life."

NOTE: Many will perish eternally because they refused to believe in Christ.

Matthew 22:29

But Jesus answered them, "You are wrong, because you know neither the Scriptures nor the power of God."

NOTE: It's important to know the Scriptures and the power of God.

John 8:24

I told you that you would die in your sins, for unless you believe that I AM [he], you will die in your sins."

NOTE: Jesus taught that people will die in their sins unless they believe that Christ is who He claimed to be, the I AM, the Savior of the world.

Matthew 5:17-20

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. [18] For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. [19] Therefore whoever relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever does them and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven. [20] For I tell you, unless your righteousness exceeds that of the scribes and Pharisees, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 7:21-23

"Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. [22] On that day many will say to me, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?' [23] And then will I declare to them, 'I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.'"

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Let's consider Jesus at his most punitive in Matthew 25 and what he considers important.

31 When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

Then the King will say to those on his right, Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.

....Notice the main question isn't whether you believe in the trinity or the Sabbath or the virgin birth or you consider abortion a sin or homosexuality a perversion or the United States a Christian nation. The question above all others that Jesus says is important is how we treated the poor, those in prison, and strangers.

It's true that those things are essential in the gospel of Christ. But this is why it's always a good thing to consider everything Jesus taught. Jesus was not saying that belief in Him and acceptance of Him as Lord and Savior was unessential. Jesus inspired both the Hebrew prophets and the apostles to write what they did, and therefore it is contary to the message of the Bible to draw a divide between Christ's words and the rest of the Bible.

I'm not making that divide for my point. My point was that Jesus in the Sermon on the mount, certainly his most important sermon, made the care of the poor, the stranger, and those in prison a priority. There are over 2000 texts on how to treat the poor in the Bible as a whole. The texts on homosexuality are few and the texts on abortion are non-existent other than defining the unborn as property.

And yet evangelicals work against helping the poor, the stranger, and those in prison with their views on public policy and seem to think the Bible and Jesus is more concerned with homosexuality and abortion than anything else.

I don't have to deny that Jesus taught other things to make that point, so your post is largely irrelevant to what I posted.

[karl]

Instead evangelicals overwhelmingly (80%) support harsher sentencing, the reduction of funds for rehabilitation, the removal of programs designed to help educate, provide healthcare, feed, and train the poor, and favor deporting immigrants even if they are working, paying taxes, and have family born in this country.

To me it's obvious that evangelicals hate the message of Jesus.

They don't hate Jesus or his message. They are just common sense folk who KNOW that the gradual lightening of all criminal sentencing over the past decades has produced a more hardened and emboldened criminal class. There is less aversion to criminal behavior today than there has ever been. These folks KNOW that government handouts have produced a lazy, freeloader mentality. Many of these hardworking church folks cannot afford the health care and food that is given away free to illegal aliens.

For you to claim that these taxpayers should have no right to say "No!" to this rip-off is disheartening. A whole new class of slaves has been created. It used to be known as the middle class.

[cardw]

Originally Posted By: cardw

Instead evangelicals overwhelmingly (80%) support harsher sentencing, the reduction of funds for rehabilitation, the removal of programs designed to help educate, provide healthcare, feed, and train the poor, and favor deporting immigrants even if they are working, paying taxes, and have family born in this country.

To me it's obvious that evangelicals hate the message of Jesus.

They don't hate Jesus or his message. They are just common sense folk who KNOW that the gradual lightening of all criminal sentencing over the past decades has produced a more hardened and emboldened criminal class. There is less aversion to criminal behavior today than there has ever been. These folks KNOW that government handouts have produced a lazy, freeloader mentality. Many of these hardworking church folks cannot afford the health care and food that is given away free to illegal aliens.

For you to claim that these taxpayers should have no right to say "No!" to this rip-off is disheartening. A whole new class of slaves has been created. It used to be known as the middle class.

That's the myth globalists would like you to believe. Look at the actual numbers. There is certainly room for accountability in the system, but evangelicals aren't interested in fixing the system. They just want simpleton solutions that create bad guys out of the poor and throw them either in prison or leave them out on the streets.

The reason the rich are getting richer and the middle class is disappearing is that there are so many corporate loop holes for the financial industry and insurance industry, both of which produce no product. They are simply leeches of the system. That is where billions of dollars are going off shore.

Read the research on how health care costs go down when you actually take care of patients. Insurance unregulated has destroyed our healthcare system and the paid conservative pundits have figured out a way to take advantage of lower middle class frustration and create these right wing myths and provide simple solutions for the ignorant.

When I see these same lame myths and sound bytes told over and over I lose hope that any intelligent solutions are even possible. As long as these industries keep the electorate and the government dumb and incompetent you will continue to experience high insurance costs and the destruction of your freedoms.

Educate yourself and research the numbers instead of repeating what the pundits say.

[John317]

.. My point was that Jesus in the Sermon on the mount, certainly his most important sermon, made the care of the poor, the stranger, and those in prison a priority.

I agree.

Originally Posted By: cardw

There are over 2000 texts on how to treat the poor in the Bible as a whole. The texts on homosexuality are few and the texts on abortion are non-existent other than defining the unborn as property.

But those texts are still true and must be considered and followed. It would be a mistake to only accept as true or important the statements that appear the most often in the Bible.

[Tom Wetmore]

...Which of God's commandents would you be willing to compromise...

I think that idea is an underlying point of the article. It seems that a large percentage of Evangelicals have decided to make a choice among the commandments of the One they claim to follow and have decided it is expedient to compromise. That compromise results in "love your enemies, unless..." etc.

What Jesus said while walking this earth as a man are the commandments that Christians are to follow. That includes, "Love your enemies", "Whatever works you have seen me do, do likewise", "Do not even hate", "Turn the other cheek", "If one in authority over you demands your coat, give him the shirt off your back as well", "Go the second mile" , etc.

And I am afraid that Adventist are little different than their Evangelical cousins. I suspect that if given a choice between compromising on the Sabbath or loving our neighbor as ourselves, many of us would rather hold the Sabbath in higher esteem than someone in need. How many of us spend our Sabbath doing as Jesus did, going out in search of someone needing his help? Some us would be willing to die rather than violate the Sabbath. But how many of us would die in service of another, even die for an enemy? Or as Jesus did, die for breaking the Sabbath by helping those in need on the Sabbath?

[doug yowell]

You will note that I actually post my evidence. I think you would be more convincing if you would post yours rather than claiming that it exists.

Yes you do post your evidence but after reading it I can't figure out why you use it to oppose the death penalty.Every single example you cite supports the death penalty. By your own evidence the death penalty is not itself evil. Every single reference allows for the death penalty to be justly imposed under restricted circumstances. This is something that the overwhelming majority of evangelical/conservatives believe in.Zuckerman is the one who offers no evidence for his assertions that Jesus demands an end to all governmental punishments.Zuckerman offers no evidence that Christians support the death penalty for even the most trivial of crimes. By the evidence you've posted his blame would extend to Franklin,Jefferson,and every other signer of the U.S. Constitution who allowed for the death penalty in cases such as treason and murder. So why do you present the arguments of those men as proof that they were against the death penalty if, in fact, they favored it?

[doug yowell]

The injustice of Jesus punishment was not the extent of His punishment but rather the injustice of His being declared not guilty of crimes He didn't commit and being executed as though He had been guilty of committing them

He was guilty of claiming to be the Son of God and he was guilty of flaunting the law as established by the Jewish government. So, since the Jewish court was taking the role of Caesar in your view on government, they were completely justified for killing Jesus.

What is notable is that even in this country there was a time you could be put to death for being an atheist.

A couple of facts about Christian theology and historical fact here,Rich. 1)Jesus not only claimed to be God but He demonstrated it over and over again.2)Jewish laws forbid blasphemy, something that Jesus was not guilty of.3)Everything that happened to Jesus legally that night was in violation of the established Jewish legal code.4)Roman law forbid the Jews from executing the death penalty so they needed to pressure Pilate to do it for them.5) Pilate (as representative of the legal code) declared that Jesus was NOT GUILTY!!6)Jesus, the perfectly innocent,accepted the death penalty in lieu of our perfectly guilty status before the judgment court of heaven.If Jesus had not agreed that the death penalty was a just penalty for treason He would not have subjected Himself to it for our benefit.

[doug yowell]

Originally Posted By: ClubV12

...Which of God's commandents would you be willing to compromise...

I think that idea is an underlying point of the article. It seems that a large percentage of Evangelicals have decided to make a choice among the commandments of the One they claim to follow and have decided it is expedient to compromise. That compromise results in "love your enemies, unless..." etc.

What Jesus said while walking this earth as a man are the commandments that Christians are to follow. That includes, "Love your enemies", "Whatever works you have seen me do, do likewise", "Do not even hate", "Turn the other cheek", "If one in authority over you demands your coat, give him the shirt off your back as well", "Go the second mile" , etc.

And I am afraid that Adventist are little different than their Evangelical cousins. I suspect that if given a choice between compromising on the Sabbath or loving our neighbor as ourselves, many of us would rather hold the Sabbath in higher esteem than someone in need. How many of us spend our Sabbath doing as Jesus did, going out in search of someone needing his help? Some us would be willing to die rather than violate the Sabbath. But how many of us would die in service of another, even die for an enemy? Or as Jesus did, die for breaking the Sabbath by helping those in need on the Sabbath?

Another empty assertion,Tom.You have yet to establish that Zuckerman's charges against Evangelicals are accurate. Start with the death penalty argument. Remember Jesus didn't say that love required His followers to not support jail time for murderers. Isn't that exactly what you are saying that "turn the other cheek" requires?

[ClubV12]

If for no other reason than the mistakes that have been made with the death penalty, those wrongly convicted condemnded to death, we have to stop. "Mankind" is just not qualified enough to make a life or death decisison, life in prison is the only reasonable alternative.

[doug yowell]

This is what I have been saying all along. If we have the United States become a Christian nation then all the OT death penalty laws will be put into place because according to you Jesus supports people being put to death for adultery, homosexuality, trying to convert people to another religion, breaking the Sabbath, and more. Here is a link for a complete list.

Since our founding as a nation, we've been a Christian nation with a secular form of government. THis was a great part of the genius of our founding fathers. Christians attempting, for the first time, to create a system that would include everyone as equal participants. It speaks to the strengths of modern Christianity,that it would include even those who disagreed with their religious beliefs in the governing process.If such laws as you have listed above were imposed upon the country it would be a result of the majority of citizen's voting to revamp the constitution and throw out it's religious protections,these protections are something that 99.999% of today's Evangelicals deem necessary for the country's prosperity and unity mainly because Evangelicals themselves are greatly divided an all these points.

[doug yowell]

[Paul is not Jesus. Show me where Jesus defends the death penalty. That's the problem with the Bible. To reconcile the whole thing you have to have it say both things and Paul basically trumps anything that Jesus has to say.

Christianity is largely built on the claims that Paul was a true witness to the teachings of Jesus. He,himself, claimed to have been taught the gospel by Jesus in person. The majority of the Holy Writings called the New Testament, were penned by Paul.If Paul and his apostolic peers are not all lying then pitting the teachings of Paul against the teachings of Jesus are simply an evidence that the advocate of such believes neither. Luke, a fellow traveler,accomplice,and historian validates Paul's story. Peter, one of Jesus original disciples,also supports Paul's apostolic credentials.So if there's a question of contradiction I'm sticking with...NOT.

[doug yowell]

Let's consider Jesus at his most punitive in Matthew 25 and what he considers important.

Quote:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

Notice the main question isn't whether you believe in the trinity or the Sabbath or the virgin birth or you consider abortion a sin or homosexuality a perversion or the United States a Christian nation. The question above all others that Jesus says is important is how we treated the poor, those in prison, and strangers.

If you consider the United States to be based on Christianity then why don't evangelicals support more programs to aide the poor, rehabilitate those in prison, and welcome those who are immigrants. Obviously when it comes to these issues you would rather define the US as Rome or Caesar.

Instead evangelicals overwhelmingly (80%) support harsher sentencing, the reduction of funds for rehabilitation, the removal of programs designed to help educate, provide healthcare, feed, and train the poor, and favor deporting immigrants even if they are working, paying taxes, and have family born in this country.

Now if the vast wealth of the church was in play to provide these services evangelicals might have a point about government taking on these burdens. Instead the vast majority of the wealth of the church is spent on facilities and internal programs.

To me it's obvious that evangelicals hate the message of Jesus.

First, you just changed the subject from the punitive nature of Jesus comments which included the just implimentation of the death penalty, to the alleged Christian reputiation of a plethora of other governmental (Ceasar's) programs.Zuckerman's whole argument is dressed in the sheepskin of "Why don't Evangelicals support governmental programs that are in perfect harmony with the teachings of Jesus?" "Why, because they obviously hate Jesus."What's the point of bringing Jesus into the equation if political policies demand that He be left out of the mix?There is no practical difference between the intent of the assertion and the question posed to Jesus "Is it lawful to pay taxes or not?" Second, you, as a non believer in the Bible, seem to be quite comfortable in being the Bible's interpreter for Christian's to know what the Bible requires them to support.Third,you also ommit the original source of the very mindset that you demand that Christians should support, while criticizing those who have been most responsible for the programs that are fully in place (at no cost to the taxpayer).Virtually every evangelical body has some program that ministers to the very problems you've listed. Chuck Colson (an evengelical spokesman) has for years headed a prison ministry and has advocated reforms that are light years ahead of anything put forward by Zuckerman or his cronies. The list of social programs run by private dollars from Evangelical organizations is innumerable.In addition to the heavy taxes they also are forced to give to governmental programs (mostly ineffective)Evangelicals are not the hatefilled monsters that people like Zuckerman portray them to be.

[doug yowell]

If for no other reason than the mistakes that have been made with the death penalty, those wrongly convicted condemnded to death, we have to stop. "Mankind" is just not qualified enough to make a life or death decisison, life in prison is the only reasonable alternative.

This, of course,presents the issue in a false either/or light. Was it a mistake to put Adolf Eichmann to death? the Bible allowed for the death penalty under very strict circumstances, are you suggesting that it was wrong for God to require that because of potential mistakes? The Bible is clear that a degree of certainty would be necessary for justice to be carried out. Sadaam,Joe Stalin,Idi,Hitler,Pol,ect... any uncertainty about whether they had done anything deserving of death? Maybe the wrong guy? Does this not cheapen the real value of human life?If we keep the taker of human life alive are we not saying the human life has no real value? If the circumstances are absolutely clear then what's the issue?

[bonnie]

Quote:

And I am afraid that Adventist are little different than their Evangelical cousins. I suspect that if given a choice between compromising on the Sabbath or loving our neighbor as ourselves, many of us would rather hold the Sabbath in higher esteem than someone in need. How many of us spend our Sabbath doing as Jesus did, going out in search of someone needing his help? Some us would be willing to die rather than violate the Sabbath. But how many of us would die in service of another, even die for an enemy? Or as Jesus did, die for breaking the Sabbath by helping those in need on the Sabbath?

Quote:

Another empty assertion,Tom.You have yet to establish that Zuckerman's charges against Evangelicals are accurate. Start with the death penalty argument. Remember Jesus didn't say that love required His followers to not support jail time for murderers. Isn't that exactly what you are saying that "turn the other cheek" requires?

Personally I would like the proof of Tom's judgements against SDA's

are accurate. How would Tom know how the majority of SDA's,awful people that they are spend their Sabbath hours?