Christian Liberty
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2013
- Messages
- 19,707
I think a lot of people just believe this because they want to believe it, not because it actually makes exegetical sense. Few try to argue that because of Christ's death we shouldn't punish murderers now. Some do argue against the death penalty on these grounds, but even those that do usually want murderers to have to spend a lifetime in prison. Yet I'm sure you would object to someone proposing that homosexuals spend a lifetime in prison as an alternative (indeed, prison systems are only used by tyrants in the Bible and are never condoned by God or prescribed for Israel.)
The adulterous woman case isn't applicable for so many reasons, the most obvious being the entire episode still took place under the Old Covenant (the New Covenant did not begin until Christ's death and resurrection) and so the law against adultery would have applied then even if you don't believe it applied now (I think the case of adultery is similar enough to be comparable.) "he who is without sin cast the first stone" is not talking about all sins whatsoever (it would prove too much, as nobody could then be punished for any crime) but rather the victimized party who had not committed adultery (furthermore the law wasn't actually being followed as only the woman was brought out for punishment rather than the man). The Pharisees were testing Jesus, and Jesus immediately discerned where they were breaking the law and used this to avoid the trap.
Christ's forgiveness is certainly available for anyone who has personal faith in his life, death, and resurrection for their justification. Anyone who trusts in him alone for salvation, even someone who has committed adultery or homosexuality, can be forgiven. However, just as with a murderer, being forgiven by Christ does not negate the punishment.
I really think these kinds of arguments from evangelicals and so forth today stems not from sound Biblical exegesis, but because we don't really take sexual sin as seriously as the Bible does, and we want an excuse not to take it as seriously. I think there are some bad philosophical reasons behind this aas well, without a robust understanding of the real improtance of both ideas and spirituality, it doesn't really make sense why God would take this kind of covenant breaking this seriously. I think our arguments here are more stemmed from what we do or don't like than what is actually BIblical.
