BridgeWalker, are you a Catholic, a Protestant, or just a theist/agnostic who sees value in the Catholic rules?
Catholic. Former Orthodox Jew.
In that case, you have to chose whether to follow their teachings on the death penalty, or the Bible's.
Nope. The Bible, first of all, in large addresses the Jews. Although I am a Jew, I elect to follow the teachings that absolve Christians, even those of Jewish origin, from following Jewish law, for very good reason.
Second, You seem to suggest that I have to choose using the dichotomy that you have expressed. Nope. I have already chosen my path, and it cannot be characterized by the choice you name.
Third, source documents are of little use in application without interpretation. In my experience and in my opinion, faiths that claim to be based on the Bible alone are not remotely based on the Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible. I have chosen my interpretation.
The two are in direct conflict.
Nope.
It is stated in either Exodus or Leviticus that that the punishment for murder is death.
And the required procedure after having a wet dream is immersion in a ritual bath. When was the last time you visited your local ritual bathhouse? Of course, I'm guilty too. I never considered myself impure for sixty days after birth to my daughter, nor did I sacrifice two birds in the temple to commemorate the event.
Oh, and I told my my parents where they could stick it when they told me how to live my life. That's one of the big ten right there.
I was raised with the rabbinic interpretation of the rules of capital punishment. Know what those are? Basically, that the burden of proof is so high that no court should *ever* implement it. Intent in the english common law, which has been adopted into most states' criminal codes? You intend to do any action for which you performed the physical act on purpose. I intentionally murder you by swinging a lethally heavy/sharp object into your head. Intent by rabbinic standards? You have not committed an intentional murder until you make your intentions known before witness and the witness warn you, in the presence of other witnesses not to do so or you will be guilty of murder, and then you go and kill the dude anyway. Standard of proof in an American criminal trial? Beyond a reasonable doubt. In a rabbinic capital trial? You did the murder in front of reliable witnesses (reliable meaning men of reputation in the community) while clearly lucid.
So, tell me, what do YOU think the definition of murder is, and what makes you think that your interpretation is better than the rabbis? What do think God meant by "murder"? And how to you find the audacity to declare that you and that each of us, on our own, can decide what murder means?
Our criminal code needs clarification on burdens of proof, rules of evidence, qualifications for intent and the ability to form it. All of that is superfluous? All you need to decide you lives and who dies is a single word, murder?
No, I don't follow rule-books without interpretation. I lack the arrogance. the best we can do to choose how to live is to follow the best direction we can find. I don't find mine in text without interpretation. I never cease to be amazed that there are people who think we can.
And yes, I choose the Bible. Christ said not to cast the first stone until I am without sin. I've got a whole closetful of skeletons, and so I don't stone people. I don't even voluntarily participate in electrocuting them. I refrain from doing that because the people I have chosen to help me figure out what those mean have said that that's what it means.
You'll also find that a number of times in the Old Testament God supposedly told the Jews to completely wipe out other groups of people
"with the sword."
Sorry, don't have one. I don't remember the quotation marks in the original. You seem to be reading the sword part as a metaphor. Dunno where the text allows you to do that. Of course, I'm guessing you aren't one of the chosen people. I am, so forgive me if I don't go hunting Amalekites for the good of the world. Dunno who those might be, but hey, I can always take my best guess, right?
Even if you're not a Catholic, others should know that if they are going to embrace Christianity, they need to decide who to trust. A corrupt church system which creates its own rules, or the (supposedly) inspired Bible, which started the whole thing.
Some religious systems choose to preserve the illusion that they do not add any interpretation to the Bible. That's a fine choice, I guess, but it's not for me. It is certainly an illusion. If you choose to believe that you aren't living within a theological system, then you're kidding yourself. They are all organized systems, and there is no organizations under the sun that is not open to corruption. I'm all for perfection, but it doesn't happen in this particular reality. One akes the best one can find. I choose coherence and clarity over the illusion of unmarred purity.
What it all boils down to is this: who is greater, the Christian God or man?
I choose both. His name is Jesus, from Nazareth. Maybe you know him?
