Christs death or not really?

I am stating clearly that people may use the Bible to cover and hide their motives and history has shown this. If you are trying to say that the Bible should have something to prevent this, than say so, so that I can understand you. Certainly there are passages in the Bible that can be used by people with evil intent - however, if we use our reason and understanding, we can see what and why there are such passages, just as we can understand why the Bible has passages that say forgive people even if they do bad things, and also how we humans display the works of the flesh (hatred, murder, deceit, theft etc. ) instead of the fruits of the Spirit (to forgive, to understand, to do good, etc., etc.)

By saying the Bible actually supports the actions of evil people, you are either not understanding the Bible, or are displaying a biased view regarding it.


See once again you are showing youre biased. It is you who will reinterpeit what the verse says no matter what and will say something alongng the line " Ohhh it didnt meant to let your child die if hes beign disrespectfull ,its just simply exagerates his punishment". For example



If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Im awaiting for your marvelous explanation. I guess it didnt meamt that right?

So a not well in his mind father could use this as a means to justify the murder of his son. And guess what the Bible supports it.

No, the Bible does not support it.

Firstly, the law is for Israel. Nowhere does the Bible say that all people everywhere should follow the civil laws of the Torah.

Secondly, in the verse, you cited the father isn’t murdering the son. He is taking him to Elder’s of the City (who functioned like law court) to stand trial, and if necessary face capital punishment. That is not the same as someone killing their child and saying, “The bible says, I did it”.

Thirdly, if you read the verse in the context of the rest of Deuteronomy the Elders were responsible before God to ensure that justice was handed out fairly. Therefore, they would, in this situation, have the power to veto the parents request if they thought there were no grounds for the accusation.

Finally, the Book of Joshua does not support the practice of genocide. It states that the nations inhabiting the land had so offended the LORD that they deserved to be wiped from history. And the book records, Israel acting as God’s tool for carrying out this judgement. But it does not support genocide nor does it encourage the practice.

1 Like

So a Jew father is free to do it? Because news flash they still follow the Torah

In what society in their right minds is it JUSTLY to even consider taking a life because someones child is rebelious?

There shouldnt even be any need for the elders to even decide . I mean are you serious? What kind of human are you?

Ayyy yes people offend YWHW so lets wipe them out

People offend Jesus" pray for them"


Never said that. Please don’t put words in my mouth. Neither, do I don’t think a Jewish person would say that. Jews today don’t just follow the Torah but also rabbinical traditions and the laws of the land they find themselves in. Your lack of understanding about the topics you wish to discuss is derailing your arguments.

We weren’t talking about whether it is was just or not by 21st century democratic standards but rather what the verse meant in its historical, cultural context. Also I don’t appricaite ad hominems.

Again, that is not what I said. What explained to you was what the book of Joshua records and why it cannot be used to justify genocide. Though in hindsight, ‘offend’ was a poor word choice on my part.

1 Like

‘The Eastern Orthodox Church , officially the Orthodox Catholic Church

1 Like

So God can act as violent as he wants as long as is in a “cultural” way.

Your argument is weak.

As extremist Muslims use the Quran to justify theur actions Christians can use tbe book to justify theirs.


I could havw flagged 3 posts above because of your aggressive attitude but i didnt. Next time i wont hesitate. Act according to the rules of the forum please sir

1 Like

He means he isn’t Roman Catholic. The word “catholic” means universal.

That still isn’t what I said. You said a mentally unwell father could use Deuteronomy 21:18 to justify murdering their son. I tried to explain that this is not what the passage says when understood in context. I said nothing about the rightness or wrongness of what Deuteronomy is describing. I also explained why I beleive that Joshua does not condone the practice of genocide. Again, I said nothing about whether I thought the actions of the Israelites were right or wrong… Or God for that matter.

Sure of course they can, and some do. BUT using a holy book to justify one’s action is not the same as a the holy book justifying their actions. For example, a person justifying genocide because due to a faulty understanding of the Bible, is not the same as the Bible teaching that it is ok to commit genocide. Similarly, an extremist using the Quran to justify an act of terror is not the same as the Quran teaching it is OK to commit acts of terror.

Flag away, Nick. If any of my posts have been in breach of the forum guidelines I would expect someone to flag it, that way the other moderators can pick it up with me as they would any other user. So again, please do flag them. I am after all, not above the rules.

Nevertheless, it has never been my intention to come across as aggressive, for that, I apologise. I’ve also editted my post above to remove the comment about your tone.

1 Like

Alright then. Do you think that Israelites commited genocide since the book clearly states so? If yes do you condemn it? If so how can a loving God command such a thing?

See my argument im trying to make?

Let me put it this way

God calls for genocide- isralites commit it- Christian believes in God-Since God justified genocide why its evil?

So, who does the Book say says that the nations inhabiting the land had so offended the LORD that they deserved to be wiped from history? I can’t find that. And could the Book not possibly comment as to whether it agreed?

I have tried to engage you in a meaningful conversation with little success - I will make this my last response.

I have pointed out that to understand any act by us, we need to consider the intent and motive, and if this is good or evil. You keep harking to writings that you interpret in a robotic manner.

To answer your reference to a rebellious son. What would be different to you, if (a) the case for an unsound minded person referring to some verse, and taking acts that would kill, as opposed to (b) an unsound minded person not referring to some verse and taking acts that would kill?

The act and motive/intent would be the same, and (a) person would try to justify his evil act; nothing else would be different.

Now we have biblical teaching that shows a father would joyfully welcome back a rebellious son who realizes he has acted wrongly - no stoning, no hatred. How would you respond to that?

There are other examples where some acts would appear to require stoning - yet Christ said no. Consider the sabbath as another example.

As I said before, the OT contains many accounts that show Israel failed to show faith in God and did not adhere to the covenant. The lesson we Christians can take from this is that we also fail as Israel did, and we must repent and seek to do good, in whatever context, and this requires us to choose and act rightly. Christ came for this.



It doesn’t, actually. Libraries are completely accessible to the general public and you can access databases there.

Just because something is hard to find or behind a pay wall does not mean that you have to be a specialist or that it’s “classified”. Going to a library and getting help from a librarian does wonders for finding “hard to find” information.

So, he doesn’t have to be a historian by profession. In fact, no one does, to learn history, philosophy, science, or any other field of study, for that matter. I have studied quite a bit of Medieval history and especially church history. I’m not a historian by profession–I simply love to study.

Yes, you’re right.

Where did you get this information? Can you send a source?

For the longest time the wealthy minority persecuted it, really.

Actually, Liam is correct. What I said agrees with what he said about being well read and knowing where to look.

You can just go to a library, my dear friend. Libraries, including academic ones, are accessible to the public and the resources there can be used. Primary sources are not hard to come by. In the academic library where I work alone, we have tons of primary sources ranging from early church fathers and their commentaries on the Scriptures to works such as those by Josephus.

You can probably get a digitized form of it from a library. Edit: Note, assuming that the original document still exists. Caveat, there.

Edit #2: When I was in graduate school, I conducted research using the Internet Archive to find digitized manuscripts that were quite old. You can access it here.



I would agree that the Gospel message, when seriously believed and acted upon, runs completely contrary to committing genocide, holy wars, conquests, and all sorts of things. Jesus taught that we are to love our enemies and pray for those who persecute us.

Do you have enemies, Nick? When you were a Christian, did you try to pray for them? Did you try to love them? How did it go? I can tell you that it’s not easy…yet that’s what Jesus taught. Pray for our enemies. Love our neighbors and our enemies. Not destroy them. All of Scripture must be understood through the lens of Jesus. That’s how the church fathers understood Scripture. I would contend that that’s even how Paul understood Scripture. If you take the stance that Jesus is God and came to show us and tell us what God is like, then this is what God is like–dying for one’s enemies and forgiving them. The OT, therefore, must be understood in this light. Whether that is that God was just in commanding what He commanded or the Israelites misunderstood God or didn’t have an accurate picture of God at all, or some other understanding, the OT must be viewed through the lens of God’s character as revealed in Jesus.

Everyone has biases, friend. Including you. Saying otherwise would be lying, not only to others but also to yourself. We can do our best to remove our biases, but that doesn’t make us devoid of them.

Christians believe that Jesus is God and they follow His teachings on who God is and how we are to act.

I’m assuming that you’re not trying to argue that Christianity is wrong because of how supposed “Christians” have acted in the past, correct? I would hope not. How those who claim to adhere to any system or human institution act does not invalidate the system/institution. By that logic, we should just throw up our hands and give up on democracies and republics because of corrupt senators and bad presidents and prime ministers.

Take care out there, friend.
-Joshua W.


No. What i said was that the Bible actually supports all these things the “bad” Christians did

A covenant that requires my son to be stoned because he was rebelious is already a failed one.

Im glad these exist.

You havent responded to mine above though. How do you explain all these weird laws?

Some children make fun of a prophet and they die because of it. Very loving

I disagree, for the reasons aforementioned. If you can show me where Jesus says to slaughter one’s enemies, please do. I’m sure I’ll be waiting a long time, though.

Christians follow Jesus. Jesus is God, and therefore the best picture of God’s character. All of Scripture must be understood in this light. Any Christian who acts so radically contrary to Jesus’ teaching may be called into question. And the “No True Scotsman” fallacy is invalid here. Last I checked, there are no core tenets or teachings that one must adhere to in order to be Scottish. But Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. If you act contrary to the teachings of Jesus, you’re not “being Christian”. Plain and simple.

-Joshua W.


I mentioned the Book of Joshua before. Since YHYW is God as well(trinity) i dont understanf what you are saying. Jesus was at the OT as well. He commanded these. Same God no? The triune God commanded these.


Not necessarily, and that’s my point. We must understand the OT in light of Jesus. So if something in the OT doesn’t match up with the character of God as revealed in Jesus, then obviously we need to come down on a resolution. I mentioned some of these earlier, but I will list some possibilities again:

  1. It does not contradict Jesus’ character because what God did is just.
  2. It contradicts Jesus’ character, so the Israelites must have misunderstood God.
  3. It contradicts Jesus’ character, so the Israelites must have used God as a justification.
  4. None of it happened.

These are some possibilities. The list isn’t exhaustive (there are only four, after all). My point is that you need to view the OT through the lens of Jesus and God’s character as revealed in Him.

-Joshua W.


A simple question. How can you know whats true?

These are your speculations

“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6

This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.