Ajidica

I refuse to continue this debate because you reject the inerrency of the Bible. The Bible is a perfect book according to itself and if you reject this a Biblical debate is irrelevant. Read 1 Timothy 3:15.

http://www.biblebelievers.com/jmelton/punish.html

He makes a better point than I could.

As for the Judaic law not being valid, the moral laws (As opposed to the ceremonial ones) are still valid. The moral laws being enforced theocratically (Such as stoning adulturers and homosexuals) was only in force for Israel as that law was only intended for Israel, the Holy Land, whereas Genesis 9:6 Applies to everyone.

For your questions in the other thread, I'm not ignoring you, but I frankly have no answer to give you. I believe that the implication is that eventually a point comes where you cannot sit idly and let a leader commit mass genocide around you. I have no justification for it, but its my belief.

However, the questions you ask me are questions I myself wonder about so I can't really answer much better than I did already.

1. OMG REAGAN CAN BE WRONG!!!! STOP THE PRESSES!!!
You are aware he approved the largest tax increase in US history.

2/3. So if God didn't change the mind, how come Christ, a Jew, said that the OT was basicaly BS? Isn't that technicaly saying God was wrong? God is also schiziod as he was Christ.

First of all, IDK if Reagan thought of God when he said this, but Reagan isn't perfect. I admire him A LOT, but I also disagree with him on several things.

As for God changing his mind, he didn't, he wanted Israel to be an isolated government who enforced morality and killed those around them who were heathens due to their wickedness. Just as he did to the Canaanites, so he did to the Jews who acted like them. God never intended everyone to do that, only ancient Israel. It was part of his plan.

I'm really not the best person to ask though, as the questions you are asking me are quite similar to questions I ask myself (I've never doubted God holding the truth, but the other two, the ones about killing Canaan and homosexuals.)

The thing you have to understand is, according to me, ALL scripture is inspired, if its there it is as though Christ DID affirm it.

Some of the OT stuff was written for the Old Covenant only. Execution of gays was one of those things. Don't ask me why it was there back then, God can do what he wants, I don't know why though...

Well, this is how I'd look at it (From the other thread.)

The thing with leviticus is, Jesus preached a message of salvation to all and showed pity on people who in fact would have been executed under OT law (Such as adultery.)

However, Paul affirms the right to capital punishment, and before the law was even written Genesis prescribes it for murderers.

I'll elaborate if needed but that's my position.

Well, when I intentionally switched my answers to the more libertarian answer with all the nonsense questions just to test it out (Like the ones on astrology, luck, and ones asking if something is immoral in my opinion, which is different from saying it should not be allowed) and I got around where you got. The questions are still also pretty bad. Not a single question on guns even. Its the only test I've ever taken that I didn't score strongly libertarian and I've taken several.

As for felons, I agree with you there, as I believe you can lose rights as punishment for a crime, but only as punishment for a crime. Same reason jail and prison are legal. However, I don't support guns being taken away, or liberty being taken away, 'cause big brother says so.

As for your opinion on arms, I do understand your opinion, however, it is not a libertarian view and it belongs on the social scale, as opposed to the economy.

Well than, I'd be a Big L Libertarian.

Where do gun rights stand on this scale then? I know you can still be a small l libertarian, however, wouldn't it make you more libertarian, even on the small l side, to support gun rights and oppose gun control? (I get the difference with economics, but guns can hurt people, so can drugs, why should drugs be allowed but not guns? Also note, drugs can hurt others when used in certain ways, same with guns, but I do not support taking away liberty because something MIGHT go wrong.)

Just curious, but what were you talking about when you were saying "The difference between "Big L" libertarian and "Small L" libertarian.

I'm going to respond to one thing in your post via VM, I'll respond to the whole thing tomorrow or something.

About that Reagan quote: His point was that rights are inalienable and not granted by government.

To answer your question.

From -5 to +5 with +5 being unregulated Capitalism and -5 being Marxism-

I'd give Civver a -5, you a -3, and Obama a -2, I'd give myself a +4.5

With -5 being Anarchist and +5 being a supporter of total government I'd give Civver a +1 (He supports an Athenian Democracy government) and Obama a +4 (I don't know what to give you.) I'd give myself a -3.

However, TBH I don't care much about the Socialist Nuts in Europe, for USA politcs Obama is far left.

You should probably answer my question in the thread here.

I'm short on time ATM, so just so you are aware, I will be back to answer your questions, when I get time.

"Well, he might have been the first one. Christianity was built on since then, and made better. You call what he stood for "Anarchic Christianity" or "Christian Communism."

What an amazing quote! I love it

Hello Ajidica
I played the peacekeeper wars a while back. Which version is most recent? 3.19 or alpha3?

.....

SPAM ALERT! Hate to be a bother, but if you're into game stories, I've started one that I think will be quite good, if I may say so. Enjoy Blue Skies Over Bad Lands; it's a beautiful day to build a civilization...