GC, I believe mercy is an inherent part of God's character and law. To exercise mercy rather than justice, however, requires knowing motive. Since only Jesus knows motives, only Jesus can determine whether mercy or justice is appropriate. Were it not the law, it would not occur to us to inquire of Jesus the best course of action to pursue.

This discussion is scary.

Indeed when God shows us the way in which we are to walk, we should obey.

Yet to apply this fundamental principle of obedience to include executing judgment upon other people which we deem to be guilty of certain sins is the very root and foundation of terrible persecutions, bigotry and terror.

Basically this is saying it's OK to committ murder if you think someone is guilty of blaspheming God or breaking the Sabbath!

Lev. 24:16 And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death.

Obviously people were using this for murder without consulting God.

In 1Kings 21 Jezebel got rid of Naboth on the charge of blasphemy so Ahab could get his vineyard.

Stephen was stoned on charges of blasphemy.
They even tried to stone Christ on charges of blasphemy (John 8:59 and 10:31-33)

And yes, one of their reasons for wanting to destroy Christ was because He broke the Sabbath!!! (No He didn't but they were convinced that He did)

So Saul was supposed to have asked God if it were His will to execute the witch of Endor?

I do not believe so. If this were the case, why would God give the law to stone such people? Does God give us a law without giving us the wisdom to follow it?

Let us not forget that God did give some specifics in how to follow the law--such as having at least two or three witnesses before executing capital punishments. But, provided the witnesses, in light of the law, God's will was known on certain cases and the people were obligated to follow it.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Dedication, you are using a fallacy of logic known as the "Straw Man" fallacy. In this fallacy of logic, a person's argument is distorted, misrepresented and/or exaggerated in order to make it appear false. This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself.

Secondarily, by saying "This is scary," you are using another fallacy of logic called the "Appeal to Fear." Whether or not something might be "scary" does not have a logical bearing on its validity or veracity.

These types of arguments, though they might seem interesting, add little value to our discussion.

More on topic--do you believe God gave laws that He did not want the people to follow without them asking Him if they should follow them?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

No, I don't think it's a straw man at all.
I think it will be a VERY REAL ISSUE in the very near future where people will be resorting to just the scriptural logic you appeal to, to put people to death for blasphemy and "sabbath breaking".

I quoted several Bible incidents where people used what they considered the logical application of scripture to kill people that were innocent.

It's not a straw man -- it is a very REAL problem that arises when people take it in their hands to judge on these issues.

What do you think the death decree concerning the Sunday law will be based upon?


Why do you think the scriptures say, "Let no MAN JUDGE you concerning a... Sabbath day?

Why -- because the death decree will come in which all who do not "keep" the "Lords Day" will be ordered to be slain.

When it comes to the principles governing my life -- of course I am to follow and not try to find a loophole.
Principles should become so much a part of my life that I should not want to find a loophole to excuse disobedience.

But the "rules" you are addressing in this thread (at least if the application of them is a, just do it don't inquire of the Lord or ask questions), go against everything the NEW TESTAMENT teaches.
By observing a strict "JUST STONE THEM" and don't ask any questions type of "obedience" a person is going against everything that salvation stands for -- grace, mercy, forgiveness, restoration.

True, in civic law there are hardened lawbreakers who must be stopped, but hopefully there would be a fair trial preceding the execution. In God's theocracy I would expect a fair trial to include INVOLVING GOD!

Why didn't David get stoned, he committed adultery and murdered the woman's husband. Yet he is called "a man after God's heart"?

Dedication,

Your first clue that it really was a straw man argument was the fact that I said so. I know, perhaps a little better than you, what my argument was and is. When I say you are misrepresenting it, it would be gracious of you to accept that as a fact and inquire as to what my position actually is. You attacked (and killed, if I might say so) a position that I do not hold. I would attack that kind of a position too. In other words, I agree with your attack on that misrepresented position. But I do not agree with your depiction of my position, for you did indeed misrepresent it.

Please consider carefully these words, and seek to understand my earlier post for what it is actually saying, not for where you may have jumped to from it. They are two separate positions.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

Until you have begun to understand my position, this post of yours is almost unanswerable. It's a bit like the "Are you still beating your wife?" question that has no correct answer for a bachelor or a gentleman.

However, you brought up David. Let me bring up Abraham. Perhaps this will help you to better understand what I'm trying (with little success so far) to express.

Should Abraham have spent several days of fasting and prayer to seek God's will over whether or not to offer Isaac his son upon the altar after God had told him to do so? (Remember, there was no Urim and Thummim in Abraham's time yet, so he did not have that option.)

On another related point, should the Israelites have sought the priests, with the Urim and Thummim, to know whether or not they should follow the laws of clean and unclean meats, or the law of circumcision, or the laws of sacrifices? Should they seek God's sign to know His will regarding the laws of marriage and divorce? Did God give the Israelites these laws while not expecting them to have sufficient wisdom on their own to understand the laws and to follow them? Did God want them to yet inquire, knowing the law, whether or not God wanted them to follow it?

Do you think the law of stoning was in this category of "God said but you better ask Him again to be sure that this is what He wants done?"

Or do you think, as I do, that God expected people to follow His law without questioning whether or not it was His will for them to follow it?

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.