No I am not. I am not Abraham, I am not the one God the Father chose to be the father of the Jewish nation ( God forbid if I were) so he,Abraham, was given to him specific instructions he…again Abraham was to follow. Now why can’t you see that because that in it self is an astounding misinterpretation of scripture but yet you hold it up as a proof text to your ridiculous claims. Really, I don’t sincerely know what god you are following but it ain’t the God of the Bible.
Read the Sermon on the mount. Christ outlines Christian conduct. Matthew calls it the doctrine of Christ near the end. John says if any do not have the doctrine of Christ, they do not have God.
"Only those who were not guilty of the same sin could participate." Does MacArthur say any more about this? The verse references he gives relates to the witnesses being the first to throw a stone, but says nothing about those who are guilty of the same sin.
Certainly Christians are not to be like the lost, and yes he who does not believe on the Son of God is condemned already (John 3:18). However, I think your wording is "wrong". First, it suggests sins are not sins if committed by unbelievers. Second, it is just confusing.
That’s where you are wrong. I don’t reject anything in scripture and so I don’t ignore the full text. Rather I try to make for total understanding. This you, YOU, do not do to the degeneration of sound scriptural understanding.
You will not find it on Scripture (I am not sure how MacArthur came to that conclusion).
With adultery both partners were to be taken outside the gates and killed by stoning.
There is absolutely no requirement that only adulterous Isralites had to participate.
Come to think of it, MacArthur's claim really does not make much sense.
An obscure fact as to why only the woman was brought to Jesus. John 8:1-11.
Under Roman Law they were not permitted to put a man to death, John 18:31-32, ,(Matthew 20:29, John 12:32-33). And was the reason Jesus would be crucified by the Romans.
As best I can understand from a Sermon of his I found, it comes from the Mishnah. That would make sense. Entangling the religious leaders in their own additions to the law.
I am going to be honest, the Mishnah is above my pay grade. Someone much more knowledgeable would have to weigh in on that.