Community contribution

Wow, i hope you are being serious... You cant love someone and attack them. If you use hate speech while doing it, you are failing far more as a christian and human being than someone who likes sex. He was judging someones soul (in fact, a whole civilisations) but that its not about that, its pointing out the speck in someone elses ey while ignoring the beam in yours. This isnt about the final judgement of your soul, its about judging people harshly while ignoring your faults (look at the context, being literal doesnt mean ignoring context, that is someone manipulating you by selective reading) , because judgement is... Hostile! , not part of loving your neighbour. Teaching is not the same as harsh judgement. This post is an example of teaching. And you are being way too literally with the first stone thing... And i think you know it... , the principal there is very obvious, dont harm someone for being sinful when you yourself are sinful. Do you think if they were breaking he knee caps, the same idea would not apply? What about a punch in the face? What about a slap in the face? Hate speech and harmful speech is an assault do you think Jesus would fail to confront someone for doing it? This ties perfectly with love and non judgement. .. My interpretation is more consistent. In fact the literal interpretation of certain phrases without there context to the point where they stop being consistent is a deliberate misinterpretation Your knowledge of the passages beats most people, but if you end up with a bunch of rules that lets you spew hate, you have lost the message. If you are vicious and hateful, you have failed as a christian, and contrary to what you probably think, jesus says if you dont live by the rules, he will know acknowledge you when its time for judgement - saying you believe in christ without living it, is a lie, and, if you believe in jesus, you should believe it is impossible to lie to him about this - lying is also a sin. If you are serious, i urge you to speak to a bible scholar and get away from this selective interpretation that allows people to justify anything that is unkind or ill intentioned - this is not being honest, and that is false witness. I will give you a modern analogy, Sarbane oxley is a titanic rule book for financial reporting and governance it tries to pick out every scenario and tell you what you do. Other codes like King are principal based, so they say "misrepresentation is not allowed" rather than trying to cover every scenerio, because it is impossible to do so. The bible does not cover every scenario, stoning but not knee capping? So jesus gave his primary commandment to give you the principal : love thy neighbour. This is ranked (by jesus) directly below love god, becaise it is the foundation for everything else. Im an atheist, but i take this seriously. Im told i need to stay on topic, so, Lucy Craig is bearing false witness. Why is this bad? Because it deliberately hurts others which is not consistent with hurting others. She had judged them without admitting her own behaviour, so she has come to the wrong conclusion to base her actions on (judge not). So, by seeing them as something less than herself (psychiatric problem im sure), she is not loving her neighbour. Thats it, in a nutshell. You could say she believes she was wronged and its unfair to expect someone to turn the other cheek (this is where modern morality suoercedes the bible), but if she were being honest, she would admit fault, and that the harm does not amount to rape and, and eye for an eye, ruining their lives is not commensurate with what actually happened. Urg, waiting for the backlash and some dope to say she loved her neighbours too much, but i hope you will give this due consideration