Tag Info

There are a host of references to capital punishment in the Bible - the first of which is in Genesis shortly after the Flood in Genesis 9:6: Whoever sheds man's blood, by man his blood shall be shed, for in the image of God He made man. Christ did not condemn the Roman soldiers for executing the thieves who were crucified with Him. Paul does not deny ...

Solomon married his concubines, so he wasn't practicing adultery - just polygamy, which was not forbidden. David murdered Uriah, but did it by proxy. He did not kill Uriah, rather he set up a situation in which he would fall in battle. Beyond that, yes David "killed his ten thousands," but did so in battle, and thus it isn't murder. And as Caleb pointed ...

Yes, there was a special provision. God personally enacted a punishment. In the case of David, God caused his son to die and did not permit him to be the one to build the temple. 2 Samuel 12:14 (ESV) Nevertheless, because by this deed you have utterly scorned the Lord, the child who is born to you shall die. 1 Chronicles 28:3 (ESV) But God said ...

There is an interesting passage in the Pentateuch: “If a bull gores a man or woman to death, the bull is to be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible. If, however, the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not kept it penned up and it kills a man or woman, ...

The topic of the law in relation to the Gospel is one of the most discussed ones in the entire history of theology. The space here is not sufficient for arguing one view as opposed to the other. I am going to answer your question with a simple "yes", though. Sometimes a contextless, literalistic application of Old Testament law is in fact sinful, and I am ...

Many scholars question the authenticity of the Pericope Adulterae (the section of scripture you cited in the original post). http://bible.org/article/my-favorite-passage-that%E2%80%99s-not-bible Professor Daniel Wallace writes, For a long time, biblical scholars have recognized the poor textual credentials of the story of the woman caught in adultery ...

Genesis 9:5 does say that animals are held responsible but I would say that this does not mean heaven or hell. A lot of the punishments in the Torah that are meted out are of the earthly origin. As Exodus 21:28-29 (mentioned by rajah9) makes it very clear, this punishment is of an earthly nature. I don't think these texts are talking about heaven or hell at ...

In Matt 5:17 Christ is recorded as saying: "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. A second point to consider is that of the idea of dispensationalism, which (in a very brief nutshell) is the idea that we (humans) have lived under different dispensations or covenant styles of ...

It depends on which part you are talking about. The Catholic position is that the Old Law ended and it is now unacceptable to follow its religious ceremonies, however, there are certain parts of the Old Law which are still in force, for example, "Thou shalt not steal" remains applicable. Pope Eugene IV, Council of Florence, 1441, “The Holy Roman ...

In John 7:53-8:11, a crowd of men who are about to stone an adulteress to death, fulfilling the Law of Moses, are stopped when Jesus condemns them by asking for the one without sin to go ahead and cast the first stone. Additionally, Matt. 7:1-2 states: Do not judge, or you too will be judged. 2 For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, ...

In Christian ethics, animals are not considered free moral agents , and therefore are not culpable for their actions (here is an article about moral agency in general). Humans, as free moral agents, are able to choose between right and wrong and therefor be punished or rewarded for their choices. I think one way of interpreting this verse is that it is not ...

This question isn't really a Christian doctrinal question, I think. But, the most obvious answer here is that they were both kings. And the literal letter of God's law is always enacted by people (like the King's army or guards), who are generally under the rule of the king -- notably as a sort of proxy for God in the case of the Jews. So, the king probably ...

I think this is an excellent question. The Lord was waiting for DAVID to come forward and expose himself to the Law. He didn't and so the sin of fornication was repeated by his children through what happened with Tamar and Ammon. Had he been honest about HIS sin, then he would have been able to correct the sin of his son. He didn't and look what happened! ...