Police Officers Are Mostly Parasites

[Sour Masher]

maybe we can team up, you go in first and do your Kumbaya thing and after they run you out and are Yukking it up saying dumbass libertard, I walk in with the AK and get em while their guard is down.....I mean that 'd REALLY be the Christian thing to do right? Try to convert them and then when they refuse--kill em?

That depends on the Christian you are talking to and the bits of verse they choose to embrace or ignore:

The peace-loving response might quote Romans 12:17-21: "Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

The Crusader warrior types might quote, well many passages, actually, but Ezekiel 22:31 fits your bill well: "Therefore I have poured out my indignation upon them. I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath. I have returned their way upon their heads, declares the Lord God.” Now, it is noteworthy that even here, it is still God doing all the wrath, but lots of believers have used scripture like this as a guide/model to their behavior as agents of God's wrath over the centuries.

So, yeah, you would be "returning their ways upon their heads," if you chose to use scripture as a backing for your actions, which you probably would not. You are more of an Old Testament sort of guy, fwiw.

[Ken]

The peace-loving response might quote Romans 12:17-21: "Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

The Crusader warrior types might quote, well many passages, actually, but Ezekiel 22:31 fits your bill well: "Therefore I have poured out my indignation upon them. I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath. I have returned their way upon their heads, declares the Lord God.”

I've always been intrigued by the lack of context when verses are used. For example - you quoted one new testament book followed by one old testament. It's no surprise that they offer differing trajectories. IMO one is intended as a playbook while the other is intended as a history lesson (at least to the Christian perspective, obviously a Jewish perspective would be different). But you're not unique in treating them equally. That's always been strange to me.

Given context, they don't actually conflict.

Anyway sorry for off topic.

[Sour Masher]

I've always been intrigued by the lack of context when verses are used. For example - you quoted one new testament book followed by one old testament. It's no surprise that they offer differing trajectories. IMO one is intended as a playbook while the other is intended as a history lesson (at least to the Christian perspective, obviously a Jewish perspective would be different). But you're not unique in treating them equally. That's always been strange to me.

Given context, they don't actually conflict.

Anyway sorry for off topic.

As you were responding, I anticipated someone would say this and added the context. I am very tempted to continue down this rabbit hole, as I haven't talked religion with folks in ages, but I will bite my tongue for now . It is interesting that we hot topic it up big time here on race and politics, but religion seems a bridge too far.

[Ken]

As you were responding, I anticipated someone would say this and added the context.

Dang it, I hate being so predictable

[Gregg]

Not sure.

Do you guys grasp how terrible molesting a child is? It affects the child THE REST OF THEIR LIFE. It never just goes away. It cause many different types of mental issues. And it affects everyone close to that child. So I will enjoy watching those monsters die.

Would you be in favor of a pre-emptive strike that would make having anything to do with child pornography a death sentence?

[Mithrandir]

Would you be in favor of a pre-emptive strike that would make having anything to do with child pornography a death sentence?

What do you mean by pre emptive? If you are caught with child porn you must die.

[DMT]

As you were responding, I anticipated someone would say this and added the context. I am very tempted to continue down this rabbit hole, as I haven't talked religion with folks in ages, but I will bite my tongue for now . It is interesting that we hot topic it up big time here on race and politics, but religion seems a bridge too far.

Religion was debated often and hotly back on the old site. I think most of those who felt strongly one way or the other have left or don't want to rehash.

I'm happy to report that IMO religions are simply "adult fairy tales" and nothing more. Unfortunately they're very powerful tales given our collective fear of death and have wreaked great havoc over the history of humankind. And some good too.

[Gregg]

That depends on the Christian you are talking to and the bits of verse they choose to embrace or ignore:

The peace-loving response might quote Romans 12:17-21: "Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all. Beloved, never avenge yourselves, but leave it to the wrath of God, for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, says the Lord.” To the contrary, “if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink; for by so doing you will heap burning coals on his head.” Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good."

The Crusader warrior types might quote, well many passages, actually, but Ezekiel 22:31 fits your bill well: "Therefore I have poured out my indignation upon them. I have consumed them with the fire of my wrath. I have returned their way upon their heads, declares the Lord God.” Now, it is noteworthy that even here, it is still God doing all the wrath, but lots of believers have used scripture like this as a guide/model to their behavior as agents of God's wrath over the centuries.

So, yeah, you would be "returning their ways upon their heads," if you chose to use scripture as a backing for your actions, which you probably would not. You are more of an Old Testament sort of guy, fwiw.

I do not think these are contradictory.

Love, forgiveness, turning the other cheek is what we are to do when individually we are under attack.

Using force to defend someone else is different. I am allowed to defend the weak.

[Mithrandir]

I don't think anyone has called for public executions, just that they'd be happy someone who they consider bad--was dead.

This. Other posters sure take liberties with what my simple point is.

[Sour Masher]

Dang it, I hate being so predictable

I feel compelled to add that I understand and appreciate the frustration felt by Christians at the conflation of OT and NT scripture. I understand and appreciate the radical and revolutionary message of the NT. It is a big leap going from an eye for an eye to turning the other cheek, and there are beautiful messages in the NT (to me, at least). But to paraphrase Forrest Gump, religion is as religion does, and Christianity and Christians have very often not acted in line with the radical message of the NT.

[Sour Masher]

I do not think these are contradictory.

Love, forgiveness, turning the other cheek is what we are to do when individually we are under attack.

Using force to defend someone else is different. I am allowed to defend the weak.

I'm not sure I understand the contrast you make, as the passages and the initial post from GITH I was responding to was not in reference to defending the weak. It was in reference to his desire to shoot up klan meetings.

But your post here makes me want to return to the security guard killing the Proud Boy who maced him. Based on this post, is it your contention that if the security guard was a protester, he should have not drawn and fired his weapon, but turned the other cheek, but because he was tasked with being security, to protect others, he was in the right to draw and fire?

[Ken]

to paraphrase Forrest Gump, religion is as religion does, and Christianity and Christians have very often not acted in line with the radical message of the NT.

You think so? I don't see it that way at all.

What Christians in the general sense have done doesn't represent me individually or the original message any more than what Trump does represents you as an American or your views. In other words individuals (or even the vast majority) getting it wrong doesn't mean all get it wrong, and it doesn't mean the premise was wrong.

[Gregg]

Christianity and Christians have very often not acted in line with the radical message of the NT.

I am sad to say I am in complete agreement with this statement.

I believe in the words of Jesus and want to live it. Sometimes it is very hard. I have come a long way but have such a long way to go. Probably why I need a Savior.

[Sour Masher]

You think so? I don't see it that way at all.

What Christians in the general sense have done doesn't represent me individually or the original message any more than what Trump does represents you as an American or your views. In other words individuals (or even the vast majority) getting it wrong doesn't mean all get it wrong, and it doesn't mean the premise was wrong.

Interesting. I think a better current political analogy would be Trump and Republicans specifically, not all Americans. And on that front, 90% approve of him in general, and support him. Now, those 90% don't kill the 10% that are deemed heretics, it is true, so the analogy is not perfect. But when most followers of a doctrine don't do the hard bits, one has to wonder about the doctrine. Kind of like communism. It looks pretty on paper (to some), but it practice, it has never worked, and has led to pretty horrific behavior and outcomes.

[Ken]

Interesting. I think a better current political analogy would be Trump and Republicans specifically, not all Americans. And on that front, 90% approve of him in general, and support him. Now, those 90% don't kill the 10% that are deemed heretics, it is true, so the analogy is not perfect. But when most followers of a doctrine don't do the hard bits, one has to wonder about the doctrine. Kind of like communism. Is it actually feasible in practice? It has never worked, though it looks pretty on paper.

I specifically used all Americans for a reason though - because Trump *doesn't* represent all Americans just as the many mistakes of Christians historically or as a collective don't represent all Christians. Trump was obviously a mistake. Does that make democracy itself wrong? I don't think it does.

Christ would not approve of Christians. But does that make him wrong implicitly? I'm not sure it does.