Another problem as I see it is that there is no severe penalty for..............

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,983
    113
    Mitchell
    The Jews accused Jesus of lying. Pilot didn’t care what Jewish law he broke, really. He just wanted to appease the jews because he didn’t want trouble. He could only punish him for breaking Roman laws. When Jesus admitted he’s the king of the jews, that’s the law he broke as a crime against Caesar. Not lying.

    Being king of the Jews wasn't a crime against Ceasar though. The Jews had kings while under Roman rule, didn't they?
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,651
    113
    Gtown-ish
    I always thought the king of the Jews thing was just part of the mocking. I think Pilot was probably mocking the Jews for condemning an innocent man over Barrabus.

    That’s the way pilot said it. The penalty for lying wasn’t crucifixion. Making the claim of being a deity was the crime. But as Insaid, I think Pilot was just looking for a way to appease the Jews because he didn’t want trouble in his disctrict.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    No! That's not true. He was crusified for claiming to be the Son of God.
    Pilate is the one who said he was king of the jews and had it posted on the cross.

    Keeping in mind that monotheism was a Roman thing yet....well yes, and no. He replied, when asked, that he was the son of God, and the priests wanted him put to death for that. Pilate used the legal reason of him claiming he was "King of the Jews," to justify execution.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,983
    113
    Mitchell
    That’s the way pilot said it. The penalty for lying wasn’t crucifixion. Making the claim of being a deity was the crime. But as Insaid, I think Pilot was just looking for a way to appease the Jews because he didn’t want trouble in his disctrict.

    If I were a strict Calvinist, I'd he was just doing what he was predestined to do. :D
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,983
    113
    Mitchell
    Keeping in mind that monotheism was a Roman thing yet....well yes, and no. He replied, when asked, that he was the son of God, and the priests wanted him put to death for that. Pilate used the legal reason of him claiming he was "King of the Jews," to justify execution.

    As I remember it, when questioned by Pilot, Jesus didn't say he was anything.
     

    GodFearinGunTotin

    Super Moderator
    Staff member
    Moderator
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 22, 2011
    50,983
    113
    Mitchell
    The priests questioned him, as witnesses.

    Right. But that was before they took him to Pilot. Before Pilot, they made their accusations and Jesus didn't defend himself (as prophesied) as I remember reading, he didn't say much at all before Pilot.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    You haven't put me on ignore yet?

    I don't put people on "official" ignore.
    I see no reason to be disparaging to one's faith. If one proposes that Jesus might be a liar, stating "we don't know for sure".... how does one then refer to the Bible as fiction, if as previously stated "we don't know for sure?" It's playing both sides, for whatever reason one chooses to believe.
     

    Kutnupe14

    Troll Emeritus
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    40,294
    149
    Right. But that was before they took him to Pilot. Before Pilot, they made their accusations and Jesus didn't defend himself (as prophesied) as I remember reading, he didn't say much at all before Pilot.

    They asked him if he was the son of God, and he stated "I am."
     
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Aug 4, 2017
    2,137
    113
    Fishers
    I don't put people on "official" ignore.
    I see no reason to be disparaging to one's faith. If one proposes that Jesus might be a liar, stating "we don't know for sure".... how does one then refer to the Bible as fiction, if as previously stated "we don't know for sure?" It's playing both sides, for whatever reason one chooses to believe.

    Well thank you for clarifying. Your insight, as always, has been most helpful.

    Sorry, ran out of purple.
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,651
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Well thank you for clarifying. Your insight, as always, has been most helpful.

    Sorry, ran out of purple.

    It’s in the tool bar above the text box. It’s the icon with an ‘A’. You click that and pick purple. You need to highlight the text you want “purpled” first though. Don’t worry because it’s an html control rendered by your browser, it never runs out of purple.

    You’re welcome. The helpdesk is always happy to assist with these technical questions. But you might try the faq.
     
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Aug 4, 2017
    2,137
    113
    Fishers
    It’s in the tool bar above the text box. It’s the icon with an ‘A’. You click that and pick purple. You need to highlight the text you want “purpled” first though. Don’t worry because it’s an html control rendered by your browser, it never runs out of purple.

    You’re welcome. The helpdesk is always happy to assist with these technical questions. But you might try the faq.

    Shhhhh. I know where the purple is.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,174
    149
    Columbus, OH
    This should be an interesting discussion. Should "free speech," only cover (as far as spoken statements) factual speech? Should one be compelled to do reasonable due diligence when passing on things they believe?

    Specious. Who will you trust to make that determination, to pass judgement on whether you made sufficient effort?

    Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
     
    Top Bottom