21 March 2011

The Bible made him do it.

John Thomas was just doing what the Bible tells everyone to do: kill homosexuals.

From the NBC news report:

Twenty-eight year old John Thomas says nothing as he is taken to the Delaware County prison, but investigators say he told them that he killed long-time friend Maury Seidman by stoning him and blaming the teachings of the Old Testament.

Thomas explained to investigators that he killed Seidman because Seidman had been making homosexual advances toward him over a period of time and that he had read in the Old Testament that homosexuals should be stoned in certain situations.

And he was (mostly) right about that. Here's what the Bible says:

If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13

The Bible says that all homosexuals (or at least all non-abstinent, male homosexuals) must be put to death.

It doesn't say, however, that they should be stoned to death, only that "their blood shall be upon them." So any execution method that is sufficiently bloody would both satisfy God and be biblically correct.

John Thomas put rocks in a sock and bludgeoned Maury Seidman to death.

Again quoting from the news report:

When police arrived, they found Thomas crying in the hallway of the apartment building saying, “I’m not going down there again. There is too much blood.”

So God's requirement for blood was certainly met in the killing.

Thomas only did what God asks every Bible believer to do: kill homosexuals in a sufficiently bloody way. "Their blood shall be upon them."

Here's the NBC video.

View more videos at: http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com.

And here is a challenge from Zinnia Jones to all Bible believers.

15 comments:

No said...

Two more lives shattered because of the bible but it's no surprise because the guy did exactly what the book says... So sad.

I hope this will make many people wake up and smell the coffee.

LucifeR_C

No said...

Do they still make people swear their hand on the bible in court ?

If so then we'll have a rather disturbing paradox here.

LucifeR_C

RaptorJesus said...

What a sad tragedy............. :(

People of the U.S. pretty much claim to be a christian, right?

And the bible is the error free word of god, right?

Then why is this man going to jail, without an angry outrage from the christian community?
Oh yeah I forgot they like to pick and choose then ignore the rest!

My best friend is a hardcore believer, boarder line evangelical christian (kinda stupid at times)
He didn't see the video but I can imagine his response.

It would be something like this:

He would says "Humans don't need to follow the OT laws any more, the new covenant with jesus has null-void the OT laws. Why would you (Will, that's me RaptorJesus) want to me to follow the OT laws? We couldn't be friends then!"

What do you guys think? Should the christians just ignore the OT or follow the silly book similar to how this guy has acted?

I would really appreciate any thoughts on this matter.

John said...

Last few seconds of the video the father of the accused says, "...he thought it might happen.". Was this a nice edit/splice or is dad an accessory?

jbarnes0 said...

The comment about their blood being upon them, in my interpretation, should read, "It's their own fault." It's like saying, "His blood is on your hands," to mean, "His death is your fault." Only in the bible, if you are gay, your blood is on your own hands.

None of this to say Yahweh doesn't like a good, bloody murder.

Patricia Kayden said...

As a Christian I know that this idiot is not acting in Christ's name. Obviously Christians don't go around bludgeoning homosexuals, or this story wouldn't be so shocking and abnormal.

Steve Wells said...

Patricia Kayden,
You say that "Christians don't go around bludgeoning homosexuals." And that seems true enough.

My question is why? Why do they refuse to do what God so clearly commands them to do in Leviticus 20:13?

Koiu Lpoi said...

Steve, I think the answer is quite easy, actually, having asked several Christians about this. Either the entire Bible is good and true, in which case Jesus came along and ended the OT law (which as you know is a contradictory statement). The others are those who believe only in Jesus, in Love, and in no way consider the entire Bible to be true. You might call them the "pick and choose" Christians.

twillight said...

@Patricia
They don't go around killing people BECAUSE THE ATHEIST MOVEMENT KICKED THEIR FUCKIN' ASS! (Thx for this to Mark Twain, Leo Taxil and all the others.)
They WOULD do killing all around if the rest of the world wouldn't keep a gun to their stupid head.

You think killing homosexuals is not ok? Don't be a christian.
You think "Happy are those who smash babies head on rock" is not true? Don't be a christian.
You think science is actually working, and the Earth is not flat? DON'T BE A FUCKIN' CHRISTIAN!

amber_heath143 said...

As a Christian, I am curious to know where the Bible says we are to kill homosexuals.

Steve Wells said...

amber
As a Christian, I am curious to know where the Bible says we are to kill homosexuals.

I quoted the verse in my post. But I'll do again here, just for you.

"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13

amber_heath143 said...

It says they shall be put to death, it does not instruct Christians to kill them. Also, you have to study to understand the difference between the OT and NT. In the OT, before Christ, the rules were different. In the OT it says an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth (meaning, do unto others as they do to you; repay evil with evil) but in the NT, Jesus tells us that in the OT it was one way, but now, we are to turn the other cheek when we are persecuted an attacked.

I just want to say, as a believer, I very much am interested in your blog. You seem very sharp and I love being challenged. I especially like your blog about David.

Steve Wells said...

amber,
It says they shall be put to death, it does not instruct Christians to kill them.

Well, yes amber, that's true. But how could God tell Christians to kill homosexuals hundreds of years before Christians existed?

Leviticus 20:13 doesn't say, "amber_heath143, kill all male non-abstinent homosexuals." It says to whoever is willing to listen and obey, "kill all male non-abstinent homosexuals."

Would it be OK for Jews to obey Leviticus 20:13? Would it be OK for anyone to do so? Was it ever a good thing to kill homosexuals? Was it good back in the time of Moses, but wrong now?

I just want to say, as a believer, I very much am interested in your blog. You seem very sharp and I love being challenged. I especially like your blog about David.

Thanks, amber!

Tim said...

I know this is kind of a weird idea, but could heterosexual sex for reproductive purposes also be punishable by death?

I mean, God makes people, right? The standard view seems to be that God, at the absolute minimum makes the soul. This requires God to take an active hand in the creation of every individual.

But that means that by deciding when to have sex or not, men and women can dictate, to a degree, the behaviour of God.

It also means that by having sex to produce a baby, you are, in effect, declaring that God is incapable of doing the whole job himself.

To say that you can control God, or that God is incapable of doing something seems clearly blasphemous. If the meanings of our actions are treated the same as the meanings of our words, then procreative sex seems to be blasphemy.

Blasphemy is, of course, punishable by death and delivery unto Satan.

This may explain why the 144,000 of Revelation 14 have to be celibate. And why Saul of Tarsus was so keen on celibacy.

On the other hand, those are better explained by the facts that the author of Revelation was insane, and Saul hated women.

Tim said...

No said:
"Do they still make people swear their hand on the bible in court ?

"If so then we'll have a rather disturbing paradox here."

Not where I'm from. When I served on a jury a few years ago, the choice was to swear an oath on the Bile or to make what I believe was called an affirmation, i.e. promise, without swearing on anything. I'd be pretty shocked if the USA, which actually has official seperation of church and state, doesn't have something similar.

I'm not sure whether they would have allowed alternate oaths, such as swearing on the Koran or Dianetics. Or by the Hammer of Thor. Or by the Power of Greyskull. It'd be interesting to see how far the system is willing to stretch.

Don't forget that asking people to swear on the Bible is always stupid and hypocritical, since Jesus says not to swear any oaths (Matt 5:33-37).