Alright, for some additional clarity here:

I don't define "premeditated" in the same manner as does the US government. The government will also tell many people that they can get divorced, and can "legally" marry someone new. I don't define marriage the way the government does either. God's definitions are different.

"Premeditated," in my usage here, is as opposed to "accidental." If you choose to do it, then you made a decision before you acted. The killing, then, is not accidental. Biblically, this is murder. However, an accident, where no one had deliberately chosen to kill, was not considered murder. The Bible speaks of this as killing "unawares."

However, having thought about my use of the term "premeditated," perhaps a better choice might be "deliberate." That is what I meant.

As for "unjustified," the justification I speak of here, again, means Biblical justification. Again, I do not conform to the world's definitions here. This is a Bible discussion, using Bible terms, and as such, let us not waste time bringing the world into it when the Bible itself can be clear.

God defined the possible reasons for a legal (moral) killing. One was to execute justice on a murderer. It was the job of a kinsman of the one murdered to be the avenger. However, if they carried out their duty with hatred and hot emotion, God said they were themselves become murderers, and were to be killed by the same process. Their "revenge" could not be in a vengeful spirit. God claims vengeance as His own domain, not ours.

Another justified reason for killing would be as a witness to crime worthy of death penalty. The witnesses were to be the first to cast stones at the guilty one, following fair trial, and all the congregation would then join the witnesses in executing the judgment.

There were other reasons...but perhaps this is enough to clarify.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

I didn't hear back on this one yet.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Regarding post #100278 you say



If this were true, wouldn't it follow that we should still be stoning people for breaking the Sabbath, and cutting off women's hands? (to just name 2 things).

You didn't answer the question I was asking. I am asking about the act itself. Would it have been an immoral act for Abraham to actually kill Isaac?

Regarding who Satan killed first: himself.

1. Cutting off a woman's hand or stoning the Sabbath-breaker to death was commanded by God. The Law of Moses represented God's will for the COI. He gave it to them to help them obey His law. It does not, as you seem to believe, reflect God compromising to accommodate sinful practices or hardhearted sinners. It does not make sense to me to say God commanded cutting off a woman's hand or stoning to death Sabbath-breakers because the COI were too sinful to grasp His ideal will. The idea that some people have that the COI could not respect and obey God if He was merciful and loving, instead of enforcing capital punishment, is absurd.

2. So, did God expect Moses to stone the Sabbath-breaker to death or not? Was God testing Moses? And, did Moses fail the test? What thinkest thou? PS - Ignoring this question is not going to make it go away.

3. You wrote, "What you wrote makes it sound like I don't think the law of Moses illustrates God's will in any way." So, do you believe polygamy, as it exists in the Law of Moses, illustrates God’s will in some way?

4. You wrote, "A violation of the law is sin, right?" So, does this mean you believe it was a sin for a Jew to have more than one wife at a time in accordance with the Law of Moses? Did God permit sinning in the Law of Moses?

5. "Do you really think Jesus contradicted the Law of Moses?" In response to this question, you wrote, "No, not contradicted. He explained more clearly the principles of which the Law of Moses was given to explain. The Law of Moses was one explanation, Jesus Christ's was another. Jesus Christ's was better." Jesus didn't say anything that wasn't already written in the Pentateuch. “The truths which Christ presented were the same that had been taught by the prophets, but they had become obscured through hardness of heart and love of sin.” (MB 55) Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."

6. You wrote, “The law of Moses is no longer binding. It was nailed to the cross.” But Jesus said, “For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Jesus taught the “same truths” Moses taught; He didn’t present something new or better or different or contradictory.

MB 55
Through Moses the Lord had said, "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart. . . . Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself." Leviticus 19:17, 18. The truths which Christ presented were the same that had been taught by the prophets, but they had become obscured through hardness of heart and love of sin. {MB 55.2}

"... they had become obscured through hardness of heart and love of sin." You, on the other hand, seem to be saying the laws of Moses were given because of the hardness of their hearts. So, which is right?

As to who killed first, where did God get the animal skins to cover A&E? Did He kill animals?

According to Jesus, Satan was a liar, murderer and a thief from the beginning, so he wins as first killer.

Regarding the animals, God could have gotten the skin from a live animal (the Hebrew is inconclusive as to the covering; there are animals that can provide coverings without having to die) or the animal could have already been dead, so it isn't necessary to assume that God killed an animal to provide a covering for Adam and Eve.

I still don't know the answer to my question, which is why God would want a woman's hand to be cut off, or how you could think God would want such a thing.



I agree with this (with the change in parenthesis). God was, of course, merciful and loving, as that is His nature.

Regarding 2, I'll wait for Scott.



I wrote "in any way," not "in every way." The SOP tells us:



I'm having a hard time comprehending why you're having so much difficulty understanding this. Perhaps you could explain the difficulty. It says, "it is contrary to His will." Why isn't this clear?

Regarding 4, I asked you a question. Rather than just ask me 3 new questions, it would be nice if you would answer my question. In response to your questions, they would be the same as I've been saying, the same answer as 3, the same quote.

Regarding 5 you claim:



Aren't you contradicting yourself here? You've been arguing on another thread that no one could read the Pentateuch and know about Christ. Christ spoke about Himself, right? That being the case, it must follow, according your assertion that He didn't say anything that wasn't already written in the Pentateuch that the Pentateuch speaks of Christ as well. So you're contradicting yourself.

Regarding 6, that's speaking of the 10 commandments. I already addressed this in a previous quote. Here's the statement I quoted:



This is referring to Col. 2:14.

Regarding the law of Moses, do you think we should still be cutting off women's hands and stoning people for Sabbath-breaking?



Jesus said:



Where is this truth found in the Pentateuch?

Hi Tom,

I’d be glad to comment on this. There is much debate that the laws of Moses were dictated to him by God and therefore represent the way God would handle things. Jesus was confronted with this in terms of divorce and his answer was that God wanted no part in divorce, but allowed them to divorce because of the hardness of their hearts.

I believe that Jesus’ assessment applies to all the laws. They are not God’s ideals, but represent the hardness of the hearts of the people. Not only do the actual laws represent where the people were at, but the punishment did also. Jesus demonstrated this with the woman caught in adultery. Yes, according to the law you can stone a woman, but it is God’s heart to forgive and set free!

Therefore I would say that all the laws of Moses reflected the hard hearts of the people and not God at all. The sin in our hearts is exposed not only in the law, but in the punishment.

Here is a question for you: Do you think that Jesus’ words, to those who caught the woman in adultery, would have been the right words in Moses’ time to someone who caught a woman in adultery?

If your answer is yes then you have the answer to your #2.

I wouldn’t say that God was testing Moses, but revealing what was in the hearts of Israel by both the law and the punishments dictated in the law. Neither reflects God’s heart, but both reflect our hard hearts.

scott