The Bible is a basis for passing Death Penalty and supports Death Penalty - DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website! The Best Online Debate Website!
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!


Communities

The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

The Bible is a basis for passing Death Penalty and supports Death Penalty

Opening Argument

Hello to everyone! I have no class today so I might as well throw a debate. Good job with the new features. They are amazing. 

   A lot of us perceive that the Bible is an absolute pro-life collection of books. It's not entirely as pro-life as how priests positively orate it during mass. I will claim right now that there are times God DID and LET things he knew were against life.

   He laid laws written from the chapter of Exodus 21 which were roughly made after The Ten Commandments according to the narration of Exodus. A lot of chapters talk about death as punishment but I will be mainly focusing on Exodus 21. Across all Bible versions, the concept within the chapter stays the same that for committing such an act, the wages of the act is death or another punishment. I will only give two version examples. All the acts mentioned in this chapter do not only result to death for the perpetrator but another punishment less lethal.

Exodus 21:16
“Anyone who kidnaps someone is to be put to death, whether the victim has been sold or is still in the kidnapper’s possession."
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus21:16&version=NIV

"A kidnapper, whether he sells his victim or still has him when caught, shall be put to death."
NAV with New Catholic Translation

   The commandments were given to the people and even harsher specifications of that ten-rule basis was made. This is a good consequence since we basically take someone away from their current life and sell them, keep them or beat them. Many countries only give prison time for kidnapping and here we have, our own Bible, telling us kidnapping should already result to a capital punishment. I do recognize countries who do impose capital punishment upon kidnapping which are Singapore, USA and many more. 

All information contained in this paragraph will be taken from 18 U.S.C. Code § 1201
 
  USA specifically only imposes a capital punishment when the victim during kidnapping is harmed. Kidnapping alone cannot and will not be governed by the capital punishment during any hearing.

   The Bible here already declares death as the punishment for kidnapping alone. It took kidnappers crossing state lines and acts of harm to come up with a capital offense for these people when reading the Bible is enough to come with the idea of a death penalty for kidnapping. I will informally state that according to the Bible under Exodus 22:18, we put anyone who has sex with an animal to death. We are now a more considerate generation of people such that we shut off others' ability to judge because it offends others. I'd get a comment that I'm as heartless and mindless as an animal if I would agree on imposing death to people who have sexual relations with animals. That I am quick to kill a sinful child and slow to realize I could've educated that child.

Well, these were God's olden laws. Other religions may only follow the New Testament but these laws or words were still written and still came from God. I wouldn't put to death someone who has intimate relations with animals but send them to organizations that may offer help. 

P.S.- I'm still atheist. I just don't like how people use the Bible to oppose death penalty when it can indeed also support death penalty.
«1


Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
11%
Margin

Details +


Status: Open Debate


Arguments

  • Well I think it's pretty clear the Bible calls for the death for many crimes, that's no secret. 
    "I have left my Christian Religion, and realized what all Organized Religions have in common: "to replace our One and only Possible Creator God with their own version of god".- Evidence, on this website

    http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/08/200-proofs-earth-is-not-spinning-ball.html

    If you are an adult, there is no reason for you to keep believing in things like Santa, The Easter Bunny, The Cleveland Browns, The Arizona Coyotes, The Big Bang, Evolution, or the Sphere Earth Theory
  • Okay, nice post. Now let's get back to reality here.

    I feel some light has to be shed on this very important issue. Critics, in their eternal attempt to loath a G-d they don’t believe exists, call Him a monster for demanding the Israelites to commit the death penalty on anyone they suspected as breaking the law. I’d like to further mention that these people, such as you, don’t know any better because you’ve been offered a lack of information in the first place. In other words, it's not your fault you're disturbed by this Bible quotes, because you're just parroting from atheists such as Christopher Hitchens (who I admire by the way). But it is right to do so, without a proper understanding of Torah, I applaud you. . . go on and vomit. . . the death penalty is a very cruel one, and for a perfect G-d to condone it is beyond my imagination of worship.

    With that said, we can finally set things straight. I believe the evidence I'm about to offer here are irrefutable. Here's the proposition: The Bible is against the death penalty. We get it, you're shocked, how can this be so when keeping Exodus 21 in mind? You'll soon find out!

    ARE WE TO TAKE STONING FOR BREAKING THE LAW LITERALLY? 

    Orthodox Jews have never done so, and while such passages may seem like metal gymnastics to Christians, it has an easy solution for us. The following comes from my piece on the Oral Law I wrote a while back:

    On punishment:

    "But if there is a fatality, you shall give a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a hand for a hand, a foot for a foot." (Exodus 21:23-24)

    Without the Oral Torah to teach us that these are actually moral and pecuniary compensations as opposed to Lex talionis (see Bava Kama 84a, B.T. for details), we would translate this as a literal code which would only reap old wounds and adopt a schism between moral attributes in our modern society.

    Such a barbaric legal code would simply not be accepted in today's enlightened world and as a consequence, the G-d of Israel would be a very angry G-d.

                                                   ***

    The point I’m making in the paper is that the Oral Law is of divine origin, and has been transferred to Moses and the children of Israel the day he stepped down from Mount Sinai. If this is true, which I believe it is and provide sufficient evidence for, then that means for the whole span of three-thousand years, since the Hebrew year of 1312 BCE, Jews have never viewed these legal actions as binding from a literal point of view, this is very much unlike Hammurabi's code however.

    It appears at first, that the Torah is full of “don’t do this and that or die. . .” claims, but this is false, for example, homesexuality - even though I’m Orthodox, I have no quarrel with these people, in fact, some of them I know to be very bright! - but the point is, it hardly ever happened in history. Wow! You’re probably shocked to hear that, aren’t you? . . . because one of your accusations against Judaism is now paper thin. Let me explain. In Deuteronomy, we hear a lot about the law of evidence whereas one not only needs a Jewish court (or Bet Din of 71 judges present on the Temple Mount which no longer exists), but an extensive amount of evidence that, for the most part, is virtually non-existent. . . meaning, no one was ever stoned to death.

    Aside from this, you’d need two impeccable witnesses who are Orthodox Jews and have no family ties or relations to each other, or the person guilty of such crimes. The plaintiff must have first then gave a warning to the person committing the crime beforehand, and again, there must have been two witnesses to have seen this person, for example, lighting a cigarette on Shabbat. Interesting enough, in Jewish law, the guilty would have to tell them that he knows he’s breaking divine law, if he chose to ignore them or didn’t concede, then case closed because perhaps he just forgot! It now seems that one would have to be almost suicidal to want to admit to any of this! The two witnesses are then given their testimony to the court independently. If they’re testimony is different, than the whole case is dropped, but if the witnesses repeated the exact same story, it’s again dropped because of collusion. Also, circumstantial evidence doesn’t old up in a Jewish court.

    We further know that stoning was hardly ever done because of the ancient records, including the Talmud and Dead Sea Scrolls. The Talmud specifically said that once the court put to death one person in 70 years, for an extremely rare crime because everyone knew right from wrong in a Torah driven society. Rabbi Akiva however said that if he were part of that Sanhedrin on the Temple Mount at that time, he would have never put anyone to death. To him, that court was a mark of shame on Jewish pride.

    . . . “He shall surely be put to death. . .” the standard given to us in Deuteronomy and Exodus is so high it was almost impossible to ever stone anyone. But what’s the point? . . . for example, if you were to go into any supermarket in the world, and buy a pack of cigarettes, every package world wide warns you that smoking kills. . . now why do they do this? Because they want to protect us.

    Another example, you go and buy an ice-pick, it warns you not to accidentally stab yourself in the head, and that’s far more deadlier than smoking! But unlike cigarettes, we hardly ever find a picture of this, why? Because it’s obvious, but that’s not always the same with smoking.

    The same goes for the Torah. . . when it says in there not to light fires on Shabbat, or sleep with a fella of your gender, it’s warning you this because you’re killing yourself spiritually. . . and the “picture” is spiritual death through physicality because it’s not obvious! Simply put, G-d is warning us not to commit these divine crimes or we’ll be put to death. . . but does He really want that? No! That’s why in Ezekiel 18:23, the Creator said: “Do I desire the death of the wicked? says Adonai. Is it not rather in his repenting of his ways that he may live?”

    Lastly, you could ask me why should a person suffer reading through all this for a sin he or she wishes to commit privately in their own home? The reason is simple. The choices we make not only affect ourselves, but the world at large.

    “Moses once exclaimed to G-d, ‘One person sins, and You are angry at the entire community?’” (Bamidbar, 16:22).

    Later, in the Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 4:6), Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai used an allegory to explain the answer. He taught that there are three people on a boat, and one suddenly picks up a drill and starts drilling underneath himself, the others look on in shock:

    "What are you doing?" demanded his friends.

    "What concern is it of yours?" he responded. "Am I not drilling under my own seat?"

    They said to him: "Yes, but the waters will come up and drown the entire boat!"

    The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 4:5), asks “Why was the first human created alone? . . . To teach you that every person mustn't say: ‘For me the world was created.’"

    Moses Maimonides, one of our great Sages, taught us in his Sefer Hilchot Teshuvah 3:4, that "A person should always view himself and the entire world as if it is exactly balanced. If he does one mitzvah (a good deed), he is meritorious, for he has weighed himself and the entire world to the side of merit, and he has caused for himself and for all, salvation and redemption."

    If we work together, and do what is right, may the Messiah come speedily in our day.

    The problem with atheists, and I predict you'd have stated this next, is that they invents all sorts of stories around the Torah, one of them is to cite Numbers 15:32-36, where they will claim an “innocent” person was stoned to death simply. . . you guessed it, for breaking Shabbat, a ritual infraction. According to them, the man either forgot or didn’t care to heed the warnings of Exodus 20:8-10 and 31:14-17. The reason why this is such a problem is because the Talmud prohibited stoning and enacted such standards that it was almost impossible to ever carry it out. Of course, I, as a religious Jew, believe the Talmud (halachic section only) to be of divine nature, given to Moses alongside the Torah. But if the man in Numbers 15 was stoned to death without trial, would that somehow prove that the Oral Law wasn’t given at Sinai, but invented out of necessity much later, and even more important, stain Judaism’s moral code as a religion of peace?

    Firstly, some errors must be corrected, the man in Numbers 15 was not Jewish by birth, but a convert, if my memory serves me right, I believe an Egyptian. But what was his crime? He supposedly snubbed his Creator.

    But if you thought he was unlawfully put to death, you'd be right in your assertion! His execution wasn’t legal based off Oral Law. In fact, Oral Law teaches us that the man wasn’t even to by hurt in the slightest!

    This is because of two reasons. For one, Rashi, a great commentator of the Bible, attests to the fact in Sanhedrin 41a that the man was clearly warned by the surrounding witnesses but ignored them - since he didn’t acknowledge his sin, he couldn't be punished. Secondly, the Torah is not always told in chronological order. One can find examples of this, for instance, in Exodus chapter 19, where we read about the preparations made by the people prior to receiving the Torah - but then the opening to chapter 25 reads, "And HaShem [G-d] said to Moses on Mount Sinai. . . ." According to Rashi, this happened first. It's why the people committed sins they didn't know they were committing - because the Torah wasn't yet in their hands! This is why when a man cursed G-d (Leviticus 24:10-23), he wasn't punished immediately - because that Torah precept wasn't known then. Though the Jews knew it was bad, they knew not what to do with him. Another example is Shabbat, it too was given before the Torah, but what was the first time it was ever breached? (I’m talking about times when such sins couldn’t be helped, so Shemot Rabbah 5:22 and Exodus 16 don’t count).

    Numbers 15:32-36. The second Shabbat.

    Then there are some who have recently suggested that the concept of an Oral Law unravels because Moses should have known everything beforehand, however, this theory has no backbone for support. Moses only asked G-d for legal advice once the court was in action, and only if the questions were too difficult for him to answer alone. If the theory held any water, then the latter would have to had to been nonexistent. As Orthodox Jews, we have no doubt that the Oral Torah was given to us at Sinai.

    Let's get back to the issue at hand. This is our parashat sh’lach after all!

    There are two sins in the biblical worldview, one is when you commit it voluntarily, otherwise known as intentional sins, knowing full well the consequences, while the other is when you sinned unintentionally. According to Judaism, unintentional sins required a blood offering, not the other way around, with few exceptions. For instance, an example of G-d requiring a sacrifice for intentional sins can be found in Leviticus 5:20-26 for a particular case of robbery. On the flip side, we find no sacrifices for sins such as involuntary manslaughter in Numbers 35:25.

    In the Torah, blood sacrifices חַטָאת קָרבָּן (Korban chat - the "sin sacrifice") were used only for unintentional sins meaning, if a person sinned unknowingly, only then could he or she bring a sacrifice in the name of G-d. This was used as a means to an end, in order that the person would learn a lesson: A poor creature was punished for his animalistic sins, it died in his place because he failed to do good. This system helped the person understand just how severe some sins were, plus, he'd have to (as in most cases) pay for the sacrifice.

    In doing so, this person would soon realize for future reference that such sins shouldn't be recognized as mere 'accidents.' They should be paid attention too and the Mitzvot kept so that he or she is more careful in their actions and not have to take the life of an innocent animal again. An example of an unintentional sin would be violating Sabbath or eating non-kosher food on accident.

    But what happens if a person can't afford a sin offering? No worries, G-d, in His infinite wisdom, has made sure such a case would never occur.

    If one could not afford an unblemished lamb or bull, he or she was allowed to bring two doves (Leviticus 5:7), or even flour (5:11-12). This is because it’s called a “guilt offering” (or “asham”).

    And the list goes on, G-d offers more than just flour, one could just as easily use charity as a means of atonement (Proverbs 10:2, Exodus 30:15). Moreover, this Hebrew phrase, "atonement" is כפר (kappar), since we find it used not only in verses which do mention blood atonement for intentional sins, but also in verses like Numbers 17:11 and 31:50. Furthermore, the phrase, "to make atonement for yourself" is "L’Kaper al Nafshotechem” – (נפשתיכם על לכפר). There is no better example of this than Exodus 30:15, where we're told that money can make "atonement for yourself." "Yourself," is the Hebrew conjunction for "soul." Soul in Hebrew is "Nefesh" - ( נפש), and that's exactly what we find in the text.

    Christians, unaware of such passages, equate blood atonement with blood offering as the only means of salvation, but this is untrue as shown above.

    There are more examples, but we’ll stop here.

    The point to all this being, such unintentional sins don’t require a death penalty from the person, it’s just a mistake!

    Rashi later commented that the events in Numbers 15:32-36 happened a month after the exodus of Egypt. R. Nahman (Nachmanides) said it happened after Moses sent out the ten spies to the land of Israel. The convert broke Shabbat, via melacha (labor), but which? Was it the gathering of wood (prohibited by Exodus 35:3, though later resolved by the Mishnah in Shabbat Ch. 7). The rabbis asked: If gathering is permitted by Oral Law, how is it forbidden by the written standard? (Note: had the Oral Law been invented during Second Temple Judaism, I’m sure such an apparent “error” wouldn’t have ever appeared).

    Here’s a better example, from the Talmud itself:

    ר’ חייה בר גמדא שאל מקושש משום מאי מיחייב משום תולש או משום קוצר נישמעינה מהדא [במדבר טו לב] ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו מלמד שמצאוהו תולש עצים מן הקרקע.

    אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל: מקושש, מעביר ארבע אמות ברשות הרבים הוה.

    במתניתא תנא: תולש הוה.

    רב אחא ברבי יעקב אמר: מעמר הוה.

    Rabbi Chiya bar Gamda asked: “What did the wood gatherer violate? Was it detaching (tolesh) [plucking, a sub-category of harvesting] or was it reaping (kotzer) [sheaves]? Let us learn from this quote: “when the Israelites were in the wilderness, they came upon [a man gathering wood].” This teaches that they found him detaching wood from the ground.” (j. Sanhedrin 5:1). [See note below]

    Rav Yehudah said in the name of Samuel: “The mekoshesh carried [the wood] four cubits in a public domain.”

    A Tannaitic source taught: “He chopped [the wood] off [the tree].”

    Rav Acha son of Rabbi Jacob said: “He bound them together.” (b. Shabbat 96b).

                                            ***

    Note: ר’ חייה בר גמדא שאל מקושש משום מאי מיחייב משום תולש או משום קוצר נישמעינה מהדא [במדבר טו לב] ויהיו בני ישראל במדבר וימצאו מלמד שמצאוהו תולש עצים מן הקרקע.

    Also, Sifrei Numbers 113 says,

    וימצאו איש מקושש עצים, תולש מן הקרקע אתה אומר תולש מן הקרקע או אינו אלא איש ושמו מקושש ת”ל ויקריבו אותו המוצאים אותו מקושש עצים הא מה ת”ל וימצאו איש מקושש עצים תולש מן הקרקע.

    Was the man gathering wood (mekoshesh) - or was he detaching it from the ground, or perhaps it was his name? Based off the verse, “They found a man mekoshesh eitzim.” Hence, it can be inferred that he was detaching the wood.

    His real name was identified later by R. Akiva in Rashi, B’midbar 27:3, as Tzelofechad.

                                            ***

    So what was his violation? Was it “carrying” (ma’avir), “detaching” (tolesh), “reaping” (kotzer), or “binding” (me’amer)? Kotzer (cutting the plant at the stem) and tolesh (uprooting it) are almost identical, (תולש היינו שעוקר הדבר עם שרשו וקוצר היינו שגומם מעל הארץ), so which sin are we dealing with?

    Based on oral tradition, once the law had been established (see the law of 39 melacha or “restrictions”), nothing further could be added; since the above categories weren’t on the list, the people had to find a way to link his sins to the familiarity of the Oral Law they knew at the time. According to tradition, binding the sheaves is a violation by halachic standards, which he didn’t do, what was done was actually “bringing together” - from the root ע-מ-ר, which didn’t include binding. If so, then “gathering” would have been included originally - if one supplements it for “tying” (qosher - קושר). Note too that the perpetrator didn’t light a fire (a cardinal sin in Judaism during Shabbat). Regardless, according to the text, he didn’t care to commit an unintentional sin, what he wanted was death. He wanted to be caught. He didn’t need the wood, it was only a tool for him to break Shabbat - and remember - this happened after the parting of the Sea of Reeds! So he knew well the G-d of Israel existed.

    The convert was in jail until death, approximately a year. Why did they wait a year, because he was on trial to see whether or not he knew what he was doing (intentional) or not (unintentional).

    Now, of course this would only work for ignorant people, but not a rabbi, so you’d first think! So do we then just kill the rabbi? No. Talmidim aren’t to be executed either, every person must get a trial first. We can’t read minds to know for sure if someone was indeed ignoring the commandment or mistook it for something else. To Jews, we have a concept called Ahavat Yisrael, meaning, every Jew, even a convert, should help his fellow Jew and do everything in his or her power to encroach them not to commit sins. Plus, the court cannot execute a person if the vote is off by one (the court was made up of exactly 23 judges when reviewing such cases), and remember R. Akiva once said the court never killed anyone until that one time in seventy years and even that was considered a wicked court! Remember, if the court agreed unanimously, the perpetrator was acquitted, thus why it was almost impossible to ever carry it out! Even then, you, the witness to the crime, must lay your hand on the head of the supposed purpetrator, taking full responsibility for his death if you were wrong.

    This is Torah principle, and G-d was sure to add extensive bulwarks to the law - remember, He gave you a brain, and you must be willing to die a horrible death - by stoning, burning, beheading or strangulation, it’s nothing less than suicide! According to this law then, if x killed y before you could offer him the Torah’s position, it’d be too late, and he couldn’t be executed because you didn’t offer him the lecture in time. . . he couldn’t be killed!

    What happened to this convert, who purposely asked to die? Did he have a big reward awaiting him, or was his punishment extended into the afterlife? We do know this, the convert wanted to make a point, he didn’t care if he’d be punished in the next world, all he wanted to do was to sacrifice his own life, to be a l’shem shamayim so that others wouldn’t break Shabbat. The logic for this is simple: Tell a murderer not to commit murder isn’t enough, give him an example and he’ll listen forever. It is the same logic here, and we find this idea accepted in the Talmud (specifically the Targum Yonatan).

    The Gemara says many years later, that a Jew once saw his fence broken, and he thought about how he could go about fixing it tomorrow, after Shabbat - he then had the sudden realization that making plans on how to work after Shabbat on Shabbat was a crime all of its own! It brought him back to the story in Numbers 15:32-36. The man then penalized himself never to fix the fence so that he would always remind himself of his error. Years later, a tree grew where the fence broke. As it turns out, this same man was the convert reincarnated. . . he had fixed his mistake and afterwards, was taken to the place with his Creator. G-d never cheats people, if they give up their lives for a moral cause, they’ll live another, while at the same time, a blissful world is still reserved for them.

    Since then, the last death penalty ever carried out in Jewish history was for the death of SS officer Adolf Eichmann for crimes against humanity in 1962. He died by hanging. Currently, there are more death sentences handed down by the court, but in Israel, none have been carried out as of yet (not even a terrorist has been put to death), though the winds of time are changing, both Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Beiteinu party are pushing for the death penalty in “severe cases.” In America, both the Reform and Conservative movements co-opted with the Orthodox Union to sign a petition pertained to abolish the death penalty, or at the least, offer reforms. Moreover, polls have shown that Christians are more apt to side with capital punishment than Jews, whether religious or secular. This is just a universal Jewish value.

    By and large, I have just analyzed the passage in Numbers 15:32-36 and have shown to all our readers how to correctly interpret this passage for a Jewish point of view.

    In conclusion, my question to you, the reader of this short post, is: Did you actually devote some time studying the text before making up your mind and judging the Torah as an evil work promoting the death penalty simply because you're an atheist and just want to demolish it? If the answer is yes, then I hope I have shed some light on the issue, especially when it comes to interpreting these passages in Exodus and Deuteronomy as metaphorical, as Jews have for centuries, and hence, why a single stoning was hardly ever carried out.


    AmpersandSilverishGoldNovaEvidence
  • You're referencing the Old Testament which is outdated. Compare:

    Old Testament: eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot

    New Testament: 38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you

    Evidence
  • @Ampersand

    Shalom, my "Old Testament" is not outdated, it is just as relevant to Jews in 2018 as it was in Moses' day, 1312 BCE. To say otherwise is an insult to the Holy Scriptures. I'm assuming your a follower of Jesus? If so, please dare to show me one verse in the entire corpus of Jewish literature which says clearly and unambiguously the following: The Messiah will come, he'll die, and then resurrect on the third day.

    There is not one verse you can point to me which states this clause. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then that, by default, makes your New Testament invalid. There is only one G-d, my friend, I advise you to read your Scriptures carefully and compare your theology of Paul with that of the Torah, after all, it is truth. 

    Good luck in your investigation, Baruch HaShem
  • @Judaism There are many quotes of the OT in the NT, as said in the gospels, most prominently Isaiah 53.

    In short, the Bible can be used to argue either way.
  • @tudied ianonymousdebater 

    While it is true that we all share the right to interpret the Bible as we wish, Isaiah 53 has nothing to say about Jesus when studied in depth. Rather, it is the children of Israel.
  • Judaism said:
    @Ampersand

    Shalom, my "Old Testament" is not outdated, it is just as relevant to Jews in 2018 as it was in Moses' day, 1312 BCE. To say otherwise is an insult to the Holy Scriptures. I'm assuming your a follower of Jesus? If so, please dare to show me one verse in the entire corpus of Jewish literature which says clearly and unambiguously the following: The Messiah will come, he'll die, and then resurrect on the third day.

    There is not one verse you can point to me which states this clause. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then that, by default, makes your New Testament invalid. There is only one G-d, my friend, I advise you to read your Scriptures carefully and compare your theology of Paul with that of the Torah, after all, it is truth. 

    Good luck in your investigation, Baruch HaShem
    • Messiah was to be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:2 (Micah 5:1 in Hebrew Bible)
    • Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10
    • Messiah would present himself by riding on an : Zechariah 9:9
    • Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22:1-31
    • Messiah would arrive before the destruction of the Second Temple: Daniel 9:24-27
    • Messiah’s life would match a particular description, including suffering, silence at his arrest and trial, death and burial in a rich man’s tomb, and resurrection: Isaiah 52:13-53:12

    Top 40 Most Helpful Messianic Prophecies
    https://jewsforjesus.org/answers/top-40-most-helpful-messianic-prophecies/

    There is One Possible Infinite and Eternal Creator, the Lord God "I Am", the God of Abraham, Isaak and Jacob, so even logically there can be no other, unless someone can tell me how they can put another Infinite besides our God?
    And the God of the O.T. is the same God of the New One as this time revealed not by a Prophet, by by His Only Begotten Son Word aka Jesus the Christ which as it says in the O.T. that the Jews will reject and kill.
    2,000 years later and the hate for Jewish Jesus is still raging, until the end, when everyone will see that O.T. God again, raging in vengeance against everyone who rejected His Beloved Son.

    But there are other gods too, ..  33 million gods in Hinduism alone,

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gadadhara-pandit-dasa/the-33-million-demigods-o_b_1737207.html

    so there are many gods, but for us there is just One, the Only Possible One mentioned above.
    And God had a Son whom He named "Word", who was the first of all Gods creations. John1:1 (whole chapter) explains all about the Son and how God created all things through him.

    For a Jew not to believe the Prophesies, then your G-d is not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.


    Matthew 24:15-16 King James Version (KJV)

    15 When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place, (whoso readeth, let him understand:)

    What's that doing on the Temple mount, and why would Jews allow that to be there? It's in almost every tourist picture of Israel!?

    Visiting the Temple Mount and Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem


  • Judaism said:
    @Ampersand

    Shalom, my "Old Testament" is not outdated, it is just as relevant to Jews in 2018 as it was in Moses' day, 1312 BCE. To say otherwise is an insult to the Holy Scriptures. I'm assuming your a follower of Jesus? If so, please dare to show me one verse in the entire corpus of Jewish literature which says clearly and unambiguously the following: The Messiah will come, he'll die, and then resurrect on the third day.

    There is not one verse you can point to me which states this clause. If this is the case, which I believe it is, then that, by default, makes your New Testament invalid. There is only one G-d, my friend, I advise you to read your Scriptures carefully and compare your theology of Paul with that of the Torah, after all, it is truth. 

    Good luck in your investigation, Baruch HaSh
    Well you're wrong in your assumptions.

    The OP is arguing from a Christian perspective. If he'd been arguing from a Muslim perspective then the Quran would supercede the Old AND New testament. If he'd been Mormon the book of Morm would.

    In Christian theology the New Testament supercedes the old in many ways and it explicitly takes a different tack. What the OT says on its own is irrelevant in this context.

    Evidence
  • 1) The bible was written by men. Fallible men.

    2) At best, the bible is a collection of writings which may be loosely based on fact.

    3) God is an archaic theory which may or may not be true.

    4) Biblical evidence is ambiguous and contradictory.

    5) For many people, the god of the bible has no significance.

    Five simple reasons, which render the proposition untenable.
  • I'll keep the post short, but one thing to keep in mind is that divine law is very different than Earthly law. It would not be right to equivocate God's plans to punish man versus a government's way of punishing man. For instance, in the food with Noah, God pretty much wiped out the human population because of their sin, but saved Noah's life, and I believe 8 others. This does not support a death penalty, because God is referring to sin which man does to other men. God is not punishing the kidnapping itself, he is punishing the motive behind the kidnapping and the choice to follow through with such a deed. You could argue that kidnapping is a sin today and that is why the death penalty is okay. However, we aren't punishing the sin, we are condemning the action itself, similar to what God does, but God additionally punishes the sin itself. Therefore, we can't compare divine law to earthly judgement, however similar they might be.
  • @Evidence

    You have yet to provide evidence why this is so. G-d, in Deuteronomy, said that His commandments and love for Israel would be everlasting, would the Divine lie? Secondly, I answered this question because I wanted to show where the truth lies, Jews have always taken stoning metaphorically, I don't know what you're imaging, but a G-d condoning death is not my G-d.
  • Fredsnephew 

    Empty assertions and opinions. . . is that really the best you can do, come on?
  • Evidence 


    Are you saying you believe in multiple gods then? If that's so, no wonder you're so far off from the real truth and the ONE and ONLY ONE G-d of Israel. 
  • @Judaism

    You provide (one) answer to your own question. You ask how God could lie in one sentence and then in the next state that sections in the Bible don't have to be accepted literally but can instead be metaphor.
  • Judaism said:
    Evidence 


    Are you saying you believe in multiple gods then? If that's so, no wonder you're so far off from the real truth and the ONE and ONLY ONE G-d of Israel. 

    Infinite:
    limitless or endless in space, extent, or size; impossible there is no 'thing' to measure or calculate.
    "the infinite mercy of God"
    synonyms:boundless, unbounded, unlimited, limitless, borderless

    God IS Infinite, .. Infinite IS God, and for me and my house He's the Only God we worship, since there is Only One Infinite, and He is conscious as in "I Am", so how do you figure that I believe in "multiple gods"?

    Thank you.
  • Judaism said:
    Evidence 


    Are you saying you believe in multiple gods then? If that's so, no wonder you're so far off from the real truth and the ONE and ONLY ONE G-d of Israel. 

    Oh, .. you mean because He beget/created a son for Himself called the Word?
    (please read this carefully several times, and match it up with other Bible verse so you can see that it is true!)

    Look, It's like when God told His son Word: "Let us make man in our own image, in our own likeness", .. so what did God do?

    Genesis 1:26 Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” 27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

    Adam was created in Gods image, and Eve in the image of His son Word.

    Collations 1:15 He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. 16 For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 17 And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist.

    As through Eve all mankind came forth, so through the Son Word all things came forth, ..  all things were created.

    Here it explains the beginning with God, NOT God's beginning, but the beginning of all creation:

    John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

    You see, God is Infinite and Eternal, He has no beginning, nor end, but the son Word aka Jesus Christ IS the beginning and the end.

    Revelations 22:13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”

    The Son Word was with God in the beginning, and before that he was God, or actually there was only God, .. just as Eve was Adam before God took her out of Adam.
    The son Word is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation. For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. 

    John 1:
    14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we beheld His glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

    You see, now you have the whole story; who God is, who His son Word is, how God created everything, why, and for whom!?

    Shalom.

  • @Ampersand

    You're mixing the two, lying and interpretation are two different things. If G-d said metaphorically that the sea of Reeds opened, then He's trying to give out a moral message, if He said so literally, then it really happened. Either way, He isn't lying.
  • @Evidence

    I just got confused of your mentioning of Hinduism. But yes, you do believe in two gods: G-d and Jesus. And your interpretation of Genesis 1:26 won't help you here. . . the rabbis have always taught that G-d was talking to His angels, beings He wasn't scared to mention earlier. . . so how come He had no problem saying such, but then had second thoughts when it came time to mention a co-creator, Jesus? Why did G-d wait till John 1:1? We all know there is no such thing as progressive revelation, so why the wait? G-d could have easily ended all the debate had He took the time to mention Jesus by name in Genesis 1:1. Hence, your god is imperfect, but the not the real, true G-d of Israel.
  • Judaism said:
    @Ampersand

    You're mixing the two, lying and interpretation are two different things. If G-d said metaphorically that the sea of Reeds opened, then He's trying to give out a moral message, if He said so literally, then it really happened. Either way, He isn't lying.
    Yes, that's the point - lying and metaphor are separate and it can be viewed as metaphor.
  • Ampersand 

    I feel that's not the point you were making, you're now just using it to disguise your faulty reasoning. In fact, your comment doesn't even make any logical sense. The whole stoning thing was viewed as metaphorical from the beginning, the very day HaShem drop off Torah on our shoulders, which is a great responsibility. 

    G-d never lied, the Christian god did, however, when he told the world that JC was their Messiah, when he really never had the attributes in the first place. Our G-ds are not the same. Marcion of Sinope was right.

    Again, if you don't bring out any real evidence that JC was the Messiah than this conversation is over. Honestly, we should really debate the issue somewhere else, not on a thread about stoning. 

    But still, Christians have no good answer when it comes to this, all they can think up is this: "I don't know, G-d got more merciful later on?" But really, how pathetic is that? I'm not attacking anyone here, I'm just saying these are some of the responses from the other side, and they're not good ones. Did you read my post? I hope you have, it's a good answer, and actually, one which makes sense. 

    Again, I am open to debate you on the matter of Jesus. We can do it on any site/format you want. I won't convince you, but perhaps the best I'll do is make you think a little.
  • @Judaism ;

    I simply asserted five undeniable pieces of information.

    I didn't feel that the proposition was worthy of a more complex response.




  • Judaism said:
    Ampersand 

    I feel that's not the point you were making, you're now just using it to disguise your faulty reasoning. In fact, your comment doesn't even make any logical sense. The whole stoning thing was viewed as metaphorical from the beginning, the very day HaShem drop off Torah on our shoulders, which is a great responsibility. 

    G-d never lied, the Christian god did, however, when he told the world that JC was their Messiah, when he really never had the attributes in the first place. Our G-ds are not the same. Marcion of Sinope was right.

    Again, if you don't bring out any real evidence that JC was the Messiah than this conversation is over. Honestly, we should really debate the issue somewhere else, not on a thread about stoning. 

    But still, Christians have no good answer when it comes to this, all they can think up is this: "I don't know, G-d got more merciful later on?" But really, how pathetic is that? I'm not attacking anyone here, I'm just saying these are some of the responses from the other side, and they're not good ones. Did you read my post? I hope you have, it's a good answer, and actually, one which makes sense. 

    Again, I am open to debate you on the matter of Jesus. We can do it on any site/format you want. I won't convince you, but perhaps the best I'll do is make you think a little.
    Why would I argue Jesus is the Messiah when I don't believe Jesus is the Messiah and it isn't relevant to the debate?

    The issue is not whether people should believe the Bible, but for those who do whether it gives a position for or against the death penalty.

    Your position is that people must be claiming God is a liar, which would be wrong. However your claim is not true as there are many alternate explanations one of which, it being metaphor, you have already accepted. It could also be viewed as fallible men's interpretation of the divine instructions, old commandments that were correct being superceded by new ones, etc.

    It is not that there is no answer it is that there are many different potential answers depending on sect and personal interpretation, just like in the Jewish faith where a fundamentalist and reform Jew would have very different interpretations.
  • Fredsnephew

    1) The bible was written by men. Fallible men.

    Prove that, can you back in time? did you know what these men and women were thinking?

    2) At best, the bible is a collection of writings which may be loosely based on fact

    With a lot of wisdom too

    3) God is an archaic theory which may or may true

    You're uncertain, are you going to base your life on such uncertainties?

    4) Biblical evidence is ambiguous and contradictory.

    Which, the Exodus? Look closer

    5) For many people, the god of the bible has no significance.

    That's okay - in Judaism, no one goes to hell for sins/crimes they didn't know. Hindus have a place in heaven as any Jew, this is unlike any Christian or Muslim believers who've pushed for conversions throughout history, a lot of it ending in useless bloodshed

    6) Five simple reasons, which render the proposition untenable.

    Your reasons were based on uncertainties and you now expect me to give up my faith for uncertainties? 
  • AmpersandAmpersand 207 Pts
    edited February 9
    Judaism said:
    Fredsnephew

    1) The bible was written by men. Fallible men.

    Prove that, can you back in time? did you know what these men and women were thinking?

    2) At best, the bible is a collection of writings which may be loosely based on fact

    With a lot of wisdom too

    3) God is an archaic theory which may or may true

    You're uncertain, are you going to base your life on such uncertainties?

    4) Biblical evidence is ambiguous and contradictory.

    Which, the Exodus? Look closer

    5) For many people, the god of the bible has no significance.

    That's okay - in Judaism, no one goes to hell for sins/crimes they didn't know. Hindus have a place in heaven as any Jew, this is unlike any Christian or Muslim believers who've pushed for conversions throughout history, a lot of it ending in useless bloodshed

    6) Five simple reasons, which render the proposition untenable.

    Your reasons were based on uncertainties and you now expect me to give up my faith for uncertainties? 
    You seem to want to argue "Is Jehovah real". That isn't this debate.

    The question is not will you give up faith based on uncertainties, but rather should people be condemned to die because of uncertainties.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Website!

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2018 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch