- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
Originally posted by @eladarMy point concerns why Paul wrote Romans 13 and how that constrained him from urging the death penalty for man on man sex.
Considering he was a jew, the consequence is the death penalty.
If there was no punishment then there would be no consequence mentioned.
“13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.”
Paul realized that his acknowledging the authority of the Roman government forbade him from explicitly urging the death penalty, because the Roman authority would see that as usurping its powers, urging murder of people who the state had not charged with a capital crime. So he deleted the call for death, which has repercussions to this day.
Only the militant Jews would stick to the death penalty, and they were already on the outs with Rome. The Romans he was writing to wanted no part of that.
That’s an explanation I find to be plausible.
You can’t honestly claim he didn’t delete it.
Originally posted by @js357Do you actually I believe homosexuals should be executed in the US? I am not sure where you are going with this since the discussion is if the NT says homosexuality is not sinful.
My point concerns why Paul wrote Romans 13 and how that constrained him from urging the death penalty for man on man sex.
“13 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is re ...[text shortened]...
That’s an explanation I find to be plausible.
You can’t honestly claim he didn’t delete it.
My point was that Paul was most likely talking about under Jewish law. Evidently the Romans allowed some self rule within ethnic communities. Notice Jesus did not have the crowd who were going to kill the adultress go to the Romans.
carolashby.com/crime-and-punishment-in-the-roman-empire/
The link varifies my observation. In territories local laws by local officials were allowed for non Romans.
Originally posted by @fmfI did show you how murder is moral from a secular point of view.
Do you think only one bear ever poo'd in the woods? Do you think only one of the Popes was a Catholic?
Muslims allow for honor killings, so now you have a religious morality for murder. I am not sure what your point is beyond derailing the topic.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
03 Jan 18
Originally posted by @eladarRoman citizens engaged in man on man sex with legal impunity although "real men" weren't supposed to be the "passive" partner.
Do you actually I believe homosexuals should be executed in the US? I am not sure where you are going with this since the discussion is if the NT says homosexuality is not sinful.
My point was that Paul was most likely talking about under Jewish law. Evidently the Romans allowed some self rule within ethnic communities. Notice Jesus did not have the crowd ...[text shortened]... rifies my observation. In territories local laws by local officials were allowed for non Romans.
With Romans 13 and 20, Paul dodged the issue.
Originally posted by @js357What percentage of the Roman empire were Roman citizens?
Roman citizens engaged in man on man sex with legal impunity although "real men" weren't supposed to be the "passive" partner.
With Romans 13 and 20, Paul dodged the issue.
In Rome itself? Nearly 50 percent. Paul was writing to mostly Jews in Rome. Remember Christianity at that time was considered a Jewish sect.
In the eastern territories it was less than 10 percent, closer to one. Paul's audience was mostly non Roman citizens.
04 Jan 18
Originally posted by @eladarIt's also quite possible that Paul was an operative working in the interests of Rome. One can't rule it out.
Paul was writing to mostly Jews in Rome. Remember Christianity at that time was considered a Jewish sect.
In the eastern territories it was less than 10 percent, closer to one. Paul's audience was mostly non Roman citizens.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
04 Jan 18
1 edit
Originally posted by @eladarYes, and he was telling them to stay within Roman law, and then he deleted the Jewish death penalty for man on man penetration. It was fine to shun any miscreants from the Jewish community, but they couldn’t go around killing people without government oversight.
What percentage of the Roman empire were Roman citizens?
In Rome itself? Nearly 50 percent. Paul was writing to mostly Jews in Rome. Remember Christianity at that time was considered a Jewish sect.
In the eastern territories it was less than 10 percent, closer to one. Paul's audience was mostly non Roman citizens.
The audience was being told to back off on the death penalty, since Romans 13 put a cap on penalties at those determined by the government, which allowed man/man sex, and Romans 20, by referring only to “due penalties” which recognized the cap. It certainly did not set itself above Roman law.
04 Jan 18
Originally posted by @js357He deleted it?
Yes, and he was telling them to stay within Roman law, and then he deleted the Jewish death penalty for man on man penetration. It was fine to shun any miscreants from the Jewish community, but they couldn’t go around killing people without government oversight.
The audience was being told to back off on the death penalty, since Romans 13 put a cap on pena ...[text shortened]... ly to “due penalties” which recognized the cap. It certainly did not set itself above Roman law.
Where does Paul say not to make the death penalty the penalty?
Why would Paul feel the need to describe the known penalty of death?
Within the Jewish community Jewish law would be carried out. This is how the Romans worked. What was the Jewish penalty for homosexuality between two men?