Posted on 03/30/2005 6:01:21 AM PST by Born Conservative
Jesus healed others on the sabbath -law breaking activity.
Close, it's defined as entering (without permission) with the intent to commit an offense. It's a first or second degree felony, depending on the offense. I don't think "contempt of court" is a sufficient offense for it to become a first degree felony. Even a second degree felony will get you up to 15 years, and will result in loss of right to vote, right to keep and bear arms, etc. In some (most?) states it would result in loss of professional licenses.
"Jesus of Nazareth never, ever violated a law. Ever. In fact, He even stated he came to fulfill the law."
I assume you are referring to the Roman laws imposed on Judea...a conquered Roman colony.
Questions...
What is our (United Staet of America) laws, legal system, whatever you call it...based on, or derived from...in your view?
How does our legal system differ from the Roman legal system in the time of Christ?
Enough of them will. The woman is not out in the sun, nor exercising heavily. She doen't need all that much.
The laws these people are breaking are certainly NOT Gods law.Jesus said to "Love one another,as I have loved you."He loved us enough that he was willing to die for us.Is it so bad that someone would dare challenge a man made law in order to save a life?I,personally,don't think so.
The fight had been going on for over a year when independence was declared. Independence was declared 1776 July 04. The fighting started 1775 April 19 at Lexington and Concord. The famous Battle of Bunker Hill (which took place on Breed's Hill) was long over by the time independence was declared. The difference was that up until independence was declared, the colonists considered themselves Englishman, fighting for their rights as Englishmen. Afterwords they considered themselves Americans. (Some, Ben Franklin for instance, considered themselves Americans well before 1775)
I'm surprised no one has cleared this up for you yet but Romans is the work of Paul, not Jesus.
Paul was an essayist, an interpreter of Christ.
Jesus was God.
So, then, Romans is not the word of God but the writings of a wandering supporter who never met Jesus.
You need to see the timeline of Terri's case. Michael was an incredibly good caretaker for years. The hospitals and nursing homes threatened him with restraining orders he was so aggressive in getting top care for Terri. That's why there are nurses saying things against him - they are the ones that didn't like being pressured to give more care. I also believe that Michael has never abandoned Terri and is pushing for her wishes. I think he is a lout, but one that is honoring what Terri would want. I do not believe parents have a right or a say in what happens to their children after marriage. I believe the fundamental care and responsibility lies with the spouse. Neither my wife, nor I would want to cede responsibility to our in laws in case of tragedy and we certainly would not want the government coming in as a third party.
The point I'm trying to make is that this is a nsty, nasty fight between family members. You can't find worse fights than those. The Schindlers are the ones that have been going to court over and over and over. And they have not produced any solid evidence that they should be guardians of Terri against Michael's wishes.
If that is how you feel, I hope you never have to go through the h*ll that the other hospice residence and their families are enduring because of this. That's the problem here. Too many people like you are so gung ho about saving Terri, you don't care who else might get hurt along the way. As long as Terri is kept alive, it doesn't matter what happens to other people. Have you said a prayer or asked for a blessing for any of the other dying people in the hospice? What are you doing to show compassion for them? It's the worst case of the ends justify the means I've ever seen.
I too am surprised by the high amount of bond. What is the norm for cases of civil disobedience, which is what this is?
Are they being starved to death too? Or do visitors have to use a different parking lot?
And males tend to look at situations from a point of view of practicality and selfishness. (Not all men, but many men. When females can no longer "do for them", then men want them "done in".)
Just my two cents worth.
VERY interesting...
Was healing a violation of the law, or was healing someone a violation?
So did Jesus "work" on the Sabbath? don't think so.
So what part of "all" do you question is not inspired? BTW inspired means "extension of" in the Greek.
It may not be "red letters", but you can trust the words were from God, as were the "red letter" words.
Again, what law did he break? If he broke even one of mans laws, would that not have been sin since even Jesus said "obey the authorities that I have placed you under"? And yet it says that he was without sin. So, what law of man's did he break?
First, the phrase "starved to death" shouldn't be thrown around loosely. Those other residents are passing away and their families are suffering grief and loss of a loved one. It is pretty callous to marginalize their suffering for Terri's cause. If you, your spouse, parent or child were dying in hospice, how would you feel about the circus going on outside. I live around the corner from the hospice. It's on a dead end street. Only one way in and out. The visitors and guests have to get through the protestor throngs and the herds of news trucks. Yesterday, one woman was called because her grandfather was about to pass away. She rushed out the door and got hung up in the protestors by security for 30 minutes. There are so many people trying to get in to save Terri, security doesn't know people with legitimate business from the Terri supporters. In the mean time, she could not keep her promise to be with her grandfather when he passed away. When she did finally get in, he was already gone. I understand the heartfelt desire to help Terri, but the people there need to back off and let the hospice help its other residents, too. On top of that, its so bad that the elementary school kitty-corner to the hospice was closed.
Jesus was a proponet of observing the "spirit" of the law not the literal interpretation of the law. If someone would become sick on the Sabbath it was "against the law" for a doctor to perform an examination (that would constitute "work") - Jesus healed the sick and gave sight to the blind on the Sabbath.
You may say that that was not the civil law - well, for a Jew, the Laws of Moses were higher than the civil law. If a Roman judge had ordered some poor disabled woman to die of starvation while Roman guards arrested anyone who attempted to offer assistance I can say with certainty that Jesus would have interviened when the situation would have been brought to his attention.
You demean the motives of those who have been arrested attemping to give water to Terri. Please, tell me how you know for certainty that they are not directed by Jesus to bring water to a poor defenceless woman who is being tortured by the state?
Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. What good is it for a man to gain the whole world, yet forfeit his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels.” Mark 8:34-38
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.