[Vision2020] Government killing, etc.

[Ralph Nielsen]

> From: "Luke" <lukenieuwsma@softhome.net>
> Date: Tue Jul 22, 2003  4:51:24 PM US/Pacific
> To: "Ted Moffett" <ted_moffett@hotmail.com>
> Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020@moscow.com>
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Religious Diversity Education
>
>
> I do believe in the death penalty, and I don't dodge the fact that 
> there is
> controversy over this topic throughout our nation. But the death 
> penalty is
> a side issue; we would not need it if the ten commandments were 
> followed
> from the beginning. It is not the law of God that leads to confusion; 
> it is
> man's sinfulness, and in many cases his refusal to follow God's law 
> that
> bring about the controversies.
> (To briefly address the issue, OT law lays clear principles that Christ
> upheld in His ministry, and though not all OT laws carry through today,
> those principles behind them still do. And one of them is that if you 
> take
> something unlawfully, the same will be required of you. And if I 
> killed your
> wife, or your mother, you would very quickly become a proponent of the
> D penalty, regardless of prior beliefs.)
>
>     I will agree that man by himself cannot obey God's law. That's why 
> He
> sends the saints the Holy Spirit. There still is debate and argument, 
> but a
> disagreement over the death penalty is not going to put you in hell. 
> Denying
> it does not amount to heresy; you can believe the basic
> gospel and still be wrong about a side issue. I know that there are 
> many
> areas of secondary doctrine that I don't fully understand, but the 
> basic
> gospel is clear, and so are the 10 commandments. Don't get flustered 
> over
> the death penalty; rather, simply don't murder.
>
>     To boil down the rest of your arguments, it seems quite clear that 
> you
> are an empiricist, and you don't believe in anything that you cannot 
> prove
> under the microscope. That doesn't sound very tolerant to me, Mr. 
> Moffet.
>     There are many things which we know exist that you cannot get a
> scientific handle on. Life, for one. When an organism is alive, there 
> is
> energy intake and energy output, but when it dies, for some reason all 
> that
> stops. Why? What is it that keeps you alive? Science cannot answer that
> question.
>     Where does love come from? You cannot chemically analyze kindness; 
> you
> cannot dissect rudeness and attribute it to certain nerves in your 
> body. Or
> what about music? Here you have an ordered structure of things 
> vibrating.
> Things buzzing. Scientifically, empirically, music shouldn't exist. 
> Simple
> sound waves somehow fit into a coherent framework from horsehair 
> rubbing on
> strings, and you get Bach. Things smash into each other in some strange
> consistency called rhythm, and out comes CCR. Why? Science alone cannot
> explain any of these things.
>     My point in all this is somewhat obscure, so let me clarify.
> Empiricism goes nowhere. Science proves nothing, it only gives 
> evidence.
> Humans have to make the conclusions, and these conclusions are based 
> on the
> supposedly flawed and imperfect minds you keep claiming we have. And 
> even
> then, science and empirical evidence cannot conceive many things.
>     And science cannot give us the answer to morality, for science is
> constantly changing. Old theories are ever being replaced by the new. 
> If you
> try to base your religion on the words and claims of the scientists, 
> you're
> building a house without a foundation.
>     Christiants have a solid foundation, God's word. At the heart of 
> it, the
> 10 commandments. And though you might point to semi-relevant rabbit 
> trails,
> the confusion isn't over the 10 Words, but over particular 
> applications.
> Your
> attempt to confuse them and replace them with empiricism has failed, I 
> am
> afraid.
>
> Sincerely and respectfully,
> Luke Nieuwsma
>
	RALPH NIELSEN
	It is obvious that Luke Nieuwsma doesn't care how many innocent people 
are killed by governments in the name of capital punishment. He just 
loves to kill. Civilized countries gave up state killing many years 
ago. Even the Catholic Church now opposes it, after many centuries of 
enthusiastically endorsing it.
	As for Luke's imagined "solid foundation, God's word," would he please 
tell us where his God has provided the world with a definition of 
exactly what constitutes the so-called Holy Bible?
	As for the so-called Ten Commandments, I will give Luke or anyone else 
a $1,000 reward for showing us an official numbered list in the Bible 
of these alleged commandments.