(March 19, 2019 at 11:10 am)Yonadav Wrote:(March 19, 2019 at 10:02 am)Drich Wrote: did you know in 2013 there where almost 50 cases of claimed virgin births in the US? how do you think doctors would verify this condition? is it so hard to believe this same method was known by people who live 2000 years ago? what is so laughable about that?
Jesus did not have a twin he had a 1/2 brother. son of Joseph and Marry as Jesus was son ofGod and marry
how so? I'm the one who suggested that a claim to virgin birth can be checked clinically by having an intact hymen.
oy-vey.. You would normally be correct in a marriage who has been consumated. but here's the thing with this one. According to:https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/adultery/
One thing made clear from this biblical ordeal of the suspected adulteress is that the Torah gives the male partner clear prerogatives by laying the burden of proving innocence on the woman. And, while both the wife and her adulterous lover were subject to capital punishment if guilty, no reverse ordeal was instituted: a wife suspecting her husband of infidelity had no recourse. The standards were not the same and men were allowed to be polygamous.
If Mary and Joey never had sex and she shows up to be pregos.. And joseph demands he has never had sex with his wife, then she is guilty of adultery which is one of the 3 cardinal death penalty laws old sport.
She would have to prove her innocence or that it was indeed his. Which again is why the bible said he wanted to quietly deal with this and move on before the angel of the lord appeared to him.
kinda does. as two witnesses where not the only forms of verification. https://www.sefaria.org/Numbers.5.11-31?lang=he-en shows a way to invoke the testimony of the lord. (having mary's belly distend) would be an indicator needed. Again especially if husband testifies he has never had sex with his wife.
citation please
Adultery (sexual intercourse between a married woman and a man other than her husband [the biblical prohibition does not include sex between a married man and an unmarried woman]) is the only sexual offense recorded in the Ten Commandments. It is again recorded in the “Holiness Code” of Leviticus 20. The Book of Genesis (20:9) calls adultery “the great sin” and the Talmud calls adultery ha’averah (the sin par excellence). According to rabbinic tradition, it [along with incest, in the category of gilui arayot] is considered one of the three sins (along with idolatry and murder) that people should avoid even at the pain of death. The gravity of adultery is evident by the fact that the Bible describes the offense as being punishable by the death penalty for both the man and the woman.
Your ideas about justice come much later:
Laws of adultery continued to be developed in talmudic times. The unfaithful wife was dealt with extensively in a talmudic tractate called Sotah (the faithless wife). Before the penalty of death could be administered, the rabbis stated in the Talmud, a number of strict requirements needed to be met, including such necessities as the crime having to have occurred before two valid witnesses and a warning that must be given to the couple concerning the punishment for the crime in very specific terms. The probability of carrying out the death penalty was, therefore, quite remote
but it would proove she did not have sex with him which was considered adultery which again was a stonning offense. something they practice as witnessed by the the woman caught in adultery and brought before jesus (just prior to them stonning her)
Wow. Way to repeat what I told you without acknowledging the point. Unless two valid witnesses actually saw her committing adultery, then there is no stoning. Joseph could have demanded that Mary drink the bitter waters, in which case she would have either died after drinking if she was guilty, or suffered no ill effects if she were innocent.
I haven't read the NT, so I had to look up the story of your boy judging an adulterous woman. It was hilarious. Yet another NT story that clearly wasn't written by Jews.
just because you touched the based first, does not mean you represented them correctly. Yes you have knowledge, but you also know how to spin it to read as you want. or did you not know both liberal and conservative jews are born of the same law? All you demonstrated is a liberal view and I represented a more traditional 1st century view. I understand the spin most jews want to place on their history and respect the idea of not wanting to shite on their past, but at the same time it is what it is. and if you do not have the stomach to have a discussion like this, then know i am not forcing you to be apart of it. Meaning just as you find reason and belief to not want to think your ancestors would kill someone from basically something not even considered a crime. I find lots of reason (primarily because adultery is one of only 3 automatic death sentence sins, if and when it is verified.) and in this case the husband denying sex with his wife EVER, his word would be without question. pushing back the demand! to verify her virginity or face the consequence of stoning.
That said if you are stuck on the rule of two..
Her husband would be a witness to her adultery and her new born would be the second.
