Christian Morality Thread

Of course they are. "Love thy neighbor," but "Kill them from time to time when they step out of line"? Forgive someone but put them to death for their sins via the death penalty? Complete double speak that you can't justify without running in theological circles.

Yes. It's actually very straightforward.

Look at the Old Testament law for example:

Leviticus 19:18: “You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself: I am the Lord.”

Exodus 21:12: “Whoever strikes a man so that he dies shall be put to death.”
& many other examples of the death penalty.

There it is. Love your neighbor but put them to death from time to time when they step out of line.

WRT to forgiveness yet executing the death penalty, I have said a few times now that forgiveness does not mean declining to execute justice. Mercy and forgiveness are not the same thing. Not sure which part of this is confusing to you.

You are the one twisting doctrine and speaking out both sides of your mouth... "Kill, but kill with love, not hate!" Hatred implies wanting to hurt someone. I have no such desires. So please don't confuse my theoretical philosophy with the actual state of my being.

I quoted a significant amount of Scripture and Patristic sources. By all means explain to me how I have twisted them.
 
The idea of forgiveness as a procedural thing seems extremely flawed. Bad thing happens = you forgive. It basically verges on indifference. What’s the difference? White people seem very forgiving with the fatiguers.

The idea of forgiveness as closure and acceptance is okay but leaves a lot to be desired. We have to remember there’s always a greater picture.

Dynamic situations do not really have these kind of theological or philosophical questions.

The reason this forgiveness talk seems fake to me is because this is a dynamic situation. The widow can forgive if she likes, but for everyone else they’re still in the crosshairs.

That doesn’t mean you start killing liberals but it doesn’t mean you ignore the problem. Dynamic problems require confrontation and resolution.
 
Of course they are. "Love thy neighbor," but "Kill them from time to time when they step out of line"? Forgive someone but put them to death for their sins via the death penalty? Complete double speak that you can't justify without running in theological circles.


You are the one twisting doctrine and speaking out both sides of your mouth... "Kill, but kill with love, not hate!" Hatred implies wanting to hurt someone. I have no such desires. So please don't confuse my theoretical philosophy with the actual state of my being.


So you want someone who loves the enemy beside you? You felt love toward the muzzies while they were trying to capture you and cut off your head while live streaming it on the internet?


The two are not mutually exclusive. You can hate someone enough to kill them, yet do it in a non-emotional and level headed fashion. To state that a human can summon the desire to kill another human being without the intensity of a vengeful and hateful anger is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I've never heard of someone calmly and intentionally killing someone while their heart is filled with love, compassion, and forgiveness towards the person they are killing.

You don't have to love or hate people, it's not a binary choice.

I have killed people and I didn't hate them, or feel love towards them.

It was war. Which is different to Trayvon feeling anger towards Denzel, because Denzel knocked up Trayvons baby momma Laquesha.
 
Of course they are. "Love thy neighbor," but "Kill them from time to time when they step out of line"? Forgive someone but put them to death for their sins via the death penalty? Complete double speak that you can't justify without running in theological circles.


You are the one twisting doctrine and speaking out both sides of your mouth... "Kill, but kill with love, not hate!" Hatred implies wanting to hurt someone. I have no such desires. So please don't confuse my theoretical philosophy with the actual state of my being.


So you want someone who loves the enemy beside you? You felt love toward the muzzies while they were trying to capture you and cut off your head while live streaming it on the internet?


The two are not mutually exclusive. You can hate someone enough to kill them, yet do it in a non-emotional and level headed fashion. To state that a human can summon the desire to kill another human being without the intensity of a vengeful and hateful anger is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. I've never heard of someone calmly and intentionally killing someone while their heart is filled with love, compassion, and forgiveness towards the person they are killing.
Big dog you don't know what you're talking about
You've never been in combat, you've never killed anyone, and youre projecting knowledge you don't have lived experience in.
 
No threats against members
Big dog you don't know what you're talking about
You've never been in combat, you've never killed anyone, and youre projecting knowledge you don't have lived experience in.
Listen here Soy Dog, you don't know shit Mr. Go Over Seas And Fight For Jews while you leave our southern flank exposed to the cartels. Great military analyst you are.

How about this, you and I meet for an MMA rules fight, one round, no time limit, first one to tap never posts on this forum again. I'll come to you.
 
I have killed people.
Why did you do that? And for (((whom)))? Don't you know that killing another human being is a mortal sin that damns you to hell? You're supposed to forgive your enemy and turn the other cheek.

This thread is not about your military service and how your violence is better than my violence. It's about whether or not to forgive Charlie Kirk's assassin, or put him in the electric chair.
 
Because we are commanded to love our neighbors as ourselves, that is we must love ourselves first and foremost, before we can extend this love to others. Therefore everyone, a king or a subject, has a duty to fight and thwart evil wherever it pops up, to protect your family, friends, neighbours- all the people of good will you care about, negligence is sinful, there is no place for passive resignation in the face of danger or destruction. Loving an evil person also means not letting him do any harm, whatever it takes.
 
Listen here Soy Dog, you don't know shit Mr. Go Over Seas And Fight For Jews while you leave our southern flank exposed to the cartels. Great military analyst you are.

How about this, you and I meet for an MMA rules fight, one round, no time limit, first one to tap never posts on this forum again. I'll come to you.
Haha hahahaha hahahaha what are you 5?

Id take that bet 10/10.

All the veteran hate for a guy who wouldn't last 30 seconds in a gun fight.

Again you don't know anything about murder or killing. Your just projecting what YOU think...which is fine. But lecturing folks here whom have actually done the work is hilarious.
 
Why did you do that? And for (((whom)))? Don't you know that killing another human being is a mortal sin that damns you to hell? You're supposed to forgive your enemy and turn the other cheek.

This thread is not about your military service and how your violence is better than my violence. It's about whether or not to forgive Charlie Kirk's assassin, or put him in the electric chair.
Hmm maybe you've heard of Jesus Christ who forgives us of our sins?

The state has to enforce the law of man, but someone can still forgive them and live with out that anger or guilt on their conscience.
 
Screenshot_20250926_113234.jpg
In much of European history longrunning quarrels between men were decided and put to rest with a good ol' scrap. Afterwards the two would shake hands, drop grievances and go their own way. This happened amongst both commoners and nobility, in later days often involving clubs, knives and fencings. The latter were used to 'make a mark' and not to kill

Irish and British travellers (not gypsies) still hold on to this tradition, as do lower class communities in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Therefore I'd say go for it, strap on some gloves and duel it out.
 
Erika Kirk is free to forgive. The State shouldn't be.
Agreed. The state should punish criminals, including the death penalty for serious crimes. The state should also make priests or pastors available for the prisoners, to encourage them to pray for forgiveness and salvation before the sentence is carried out.

As for individual Christians, I believe we are to forgive others as Christ forgave us, and I believe that doing so lifts a weight from our souls that is by far the better choice vs carrying the hate and letting it poison you. We can trust that God will punish our enemies as is due, or possibly lead them to salvation, in which case God be praised. Vengeance is Mine, says the Lord.
 
We can trust that God will punish our enemies as is due, or possibly lead them to salvation, in which case God be praised. Vengeance is Mine, says the Lord.
As believing Christians we must have this trust, especially remembering all the injustices occurring every second around the world that nobody will ever know about. There's no hiding from or escaping God's justice- And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
 
As believing Christians we must have this trust, especially remembering all the injustices occurring every second around the world that nobody will ever know about. There's no hiding from or escaping God's justice- And even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
Matthew 5:26
Verily I say unto thee, Thou shalt by no means come out thence, till thou hast paid the uttermost farthing.

Some people only forgive minor things but not major things. When God forgives His children, He does not differentiate between small or big sins, but He will forgive anything as long we come to Him and confess and repent.
 
It's about whether or not to forgive Charlie Kirk's assassin, or put him in the electric chair.
Life sentence. No parole. And it’s asssasinS.

View attachment 23998
In much of European history longrunning quarrels between men were decided and put to rest with a good ol' scrap. Afterwards the two would shake hands, drop grievances and go their own way. This happened amongst both commoners and nobility, in later days often involving clubs, knives and fencings. The latter were used to 'make a mark' and not to kill

Irish and British travellers (not gypsies) still hold on to this tradition, as do lower class communities in the Balkans and Eastern Europe. Therefore I'd say go for it, strap on some gloves and duel it out.
Someone could stream it live and have a betting system. I can be Joe Rogan and comment. My money is on purple. 100$. Minimum bet. Winner of fight takes 25% of pot.

But I can see choppa doing some serious points since he is smart also. Purple seems more street wise. And choppa mainstream. Might fall for some faints.

Another option would be shooting range who makes more points.

Instead of mma just submission fight maybe.

UFFC

ULTIMATE FIGHTING FOR CHRIST!

Btw the last duel was in France 1967.


The combat took place after Defferre yelled ‘Taisez-vous, abruti!‘ (‘Shut up, stupid!’) at Ribière following a clash in the National Assembly.
1758872350649.jpeg

I’ve learned how to fight with sword when I was young. Fencing. I think all schools in France teach it. It really sucks. The helmet is heavy. You can’t breathe and everything is dark. The vision is really hard. You see shit. But looking back it was cool. Still know how it starts sword rise high, close to the chest and after down and right. And I know one trick.
The back hand always up. Teachers would massacre because of the back hand. attention au bras

Punching is similar to fencing. It’s the back foot that projects.

Googled a POV fencing. You see shit. And when you’re a kid. Even worse. Claustrophobic.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top