Adulterous woman

[Drich]

https://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-stoning.html

No wonder you didn't post a direct Bible verse to prove your claims because there isn't one. There is nothing in your article that says that sinless people are the ones to throw stone but "Those witnesses “must be the first in putting that person to death, and then the hands of all the people” (verse 7). In other words, those who testified against the condemned person in court had to cast the first stone."

john 8 is the passage your looking for. the link tells you why. are you trolling or are you this slow? in john 8 those who accused were the pharisees. This means they were the ones who were to cast the first stones. so what did Jesus do? he began to write their sins out on the ground. this meant they were not in good standings with God.. so what did the accusers do who's sins were being written out? they left when Jesus said those without sin cast the first stone. why? because ceremonially they were unclean and had no right otherwise if they had then they too would be subject to stoning.

from got questions: Stoning is a horrible way to die. That particular manner of execution must have been a strong deterrent against committing the sins deemed offensive enough to merit stoning. God cares very much about the purity of His people. The strict punishment for sin during the time of the Law helped deter people from adopting the impure practices of their pagan neighbors and rebelling against God. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), and Israel was given a stern commandment to stay pure: “You must purge the evil from among you” ().

here it is in the OT as well!!! purge the evil and stay pure. the conversation is over if you were an honest person.

[Nay_Sayer]

FSM however is completely cool with people doing what they want with their naughty bits. Yet another reason to accept FSM's truth.

Now if only we could purge the forum of your endless stream of verbal diarrhea, We'd be getting somewhere.

RAmen

[Fake Messiah]

What Jesus was actually doing

[The Grand Nudger]

No wonder you didn't post a direct Bible verse to prove your claims because there isn't one. There is nothing in your article that says that sinless people are the ones to throw stone but "Those witnesses “must be the first in putting that person to death, and then the hands of all the people” (verse 7). In other words, those who testified against the condemned person in court had to cast the first stone."

john 8 is the passage your looking for. the link tells you why. are you trolling or are you this slow? in john 8 those who accused were the pharisees. This means they were the ones who were to cast the first stones. so what did Jesus do? he began to write their sins out on the ground. this meant they were not in good standings with God.. so what did the accusers do who's sins were being written out? they left when Jesus said those without sin cast the first stone. why? because ceremonially they were unclean and had no right otherwise if they had then they too would be subject to stoning.

from got questions: Stoning is a horrible way to die. That particular manner of execution must have been a strong deterrent against committing the sins deemed offensive enough to merit stoning. God cares very much about the purity of His people. The strict punishment for sin during the time of the Law helped deter people from adopting the impure practices of their pagan neighbors and rebelling against God. The wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), and Israel was given a stern commandment to stay pure: “You must purge the evil from among you” ().

here it is in the OT as well!!! purge the evil and stay pure. the conversation is over if you were an honest person.

You appear to believe that these pharisees would have done anything on the say so of a new testament book, and, frankly, think that the old testament book is just wrong.  They were going to stone her in accordance with law, jesus got her off on a technicality, and that was their entire ploy to begin with, as any answer he gave would have been wrong according to mosiac law, they sought to entrap him.  You think jesus has the right of this..but I somehow doubt that a pharisee would believe that a christian or indeed christ was the authority on their laws.   I don't see many jewish people conceding this one..and it's been centuries now....

Plainly, it never happened - but, sure, it's meant to tell a story that you would very much like to tell here.  I don't think that anyone is disagreeing that this is the story told by christians.  To you, believing him to be a god, your god, it demonstrates his intelligence and authority.  For them..if this really happened and isn't just a vehicle for theological content, he'd have been a shitbag lawyer to a criminal whore and they'd get around to dealing with him...shortly.  Christian explication on their hearts condemning them and jesus getting the actual rules actually right....is blatant propaganda. It would take a cultist to believe that this was a news report from the ancient front. The story is openly whimsical, referent, and highly thematic.

[Drich]

again you seem too dishonest or stupid to see christ in the story provided by john 8, answering your question for you. again no one disputes the meaning of this story and why the pharisees left (because they themselves were unworthy due to their own sin) which answers your query of where does the bible say the people throwing stones must be in good standing with God. HERE IN JOHN 8 moron!!! I even posted a whole sermon from a well respected 3rd party that directly answers your question in the same way I did!!! they even took it a step further and said the people throwing stones not only had to be in good standing, but WITHOUT SIN completely!!!

The whole "cast the first stone" story is (apart from an attempt to show that Jesus is more clever than the pharisees) is for Jesus to make the claim to both be the only one good enough to condemn sins, but also the only one good enough to forgive sins.

The story is not specifically about adultery or stone throwing.  The story is about Jesus.

while yes primary revelation is about jesus, this does not mean turn your brain off to everyone else mentioned. 

if jesus was the only one worthy of throwing stones.. and he didn't.. that would mean he was in good standing with God/free of sin...

therefore the opposite would be true for the original accusers, Those who were picking up the stones, but realized that jesus knew they were not free of sin and were reminded by his writing that they were unworthy/not in good standing with God to judge life and death.

if what you say is true then what i said is why it is true. one explanation does not supersede the other.

it just so happens my explanation also silences a troll once one of you explain to him i'm right.

[no one]

Did you get your degree in bullshit hucking from hovind university?

[Drich]

You appear to believe that these pharisees would have done anything on the say so of a new testament book, and, frankly, think that the old testament book is just wrong.  They were going to stone her in accordance with law, jesus got her off on a technicality, and that was their entire ploy to begin with, as any answer he gave would have been wrong according to mosaic law, they sought to entrap him.

the passage in john explain the entrapment in a different way.. so you are 1/2 right.. yes they said according to the law of moses we should stone her. but roman authority would not allow such an execution. which they could parlay with the roman government into having him executed for trying to execute this woman.. or if he went against the law of moses could could then be identified as a false profit. so yes your 1/2 right the answer given though cited deut 17 which again requires the person doing the stoning/the accuser to also be in good standing with God or he too would be executed. not really a loop hole. but rather the law prevented evil men from manipulating the law to get their way. which is why those men dropped their stones. as they too could be found to be 'evil' for persecuting this woman with all the sin jesus was spelling out on the ground.

  You think jesus has the right of this..but I somehow doubt that a pharisee would believe that a christian or indeed christ was the authority on their laws.   I don't see many jewish people conceding this one..and it's been centuries now....

that is because you have not read the bible. and or you do not know the ot law well enough to make this call.

So again what happened here is based on the laws provided by moses which has three parts to it. the first says a death penalty violation must be witnessed by two or more people..

Then accuser primary must be the first to throw a stone.

the law also states they must be in good standing with God.

So here is what happened: a sinful men/pharisees brought a woman before christ caught in adultery. this only satisfy 1/3 of the law's requirements for stoning. In that a capital crime/sin was witnessed by two people. here is where you and the pharisees jumped the gun. because they were charging jesus with whether or not she should die when the accuser/witness was to make that call. they did this to entrap him.

so hebrew priest violation 1. A violation Jesus quickly identifies, and afford him time to write out their own sins.

And the 3 part of this law is the accuser must also be in good standing with God as they are commanded to purge all evil from among them. which is why jesus was writing on the ground a list of sins so great their guilt forced them to walk away.

now because Jesus was in good standing with God apparently the only one there who was in full compliance with God's law. and because he did not witness the crime like the pharisees did. he released her as he who could throw a stone didn't actually witness this sin.

Plainly, it never happened -

there is far more documentation in period manuscript that says it did, than any that challenge it.

but, sure, it's meant to tell a story that you would very much like to tell here.  I don't think that anyone is disagreeing that this is the story told by christians.  To you, believing him to be a god, your god, it demonstrates his intelligence and authority.  For them..if this really happened and isn't just a vehicle for theological content, he'd have been a shitbag lawyer to a criminal whore and they'd get around to dealing with him...shortly.  Christian explication on their hearts condemning them and jesus getting the actual rules actually right....is blatant propaganda.

again sport this story work so precisely with in the law with it's specific detail, no other outcome besides death could be possible if jesus did not know the hebrew laws so well. this story carefully navigates the hebrew law in away that only students of the law could fully appreciate. it is steeped with mastery and irony that you clearly you do not see. this would force any contemporary jewish rabbi in the same situation to yield the same way the Pharisees did, given the same details if they too observed the ot law as it was written. you don't seem to understand the main crux of any propaganda is there is very little truth or substance. here for anyone who has studied the OT law knows the depths the ot laws were used to "best" and humiliate these priests using the law provided by the OT. truthfully all bias aside, if this did not happen as described here, only a master rabbi could have written such a story to the extent and depth this was written. you know how some say i write in a 'gottacha' into my posts. there are at least 4 point where jesus 'got' the pharisees by using the law as it was written against them. and if you don't see that.. then youre not in a place to critique this story.

 It would take a cultist to believe that this was a news report from the ancient front.  The story is openly whimsical, referent, and highly thematic.

but based firmly in a culture that is verified by historians, (this sort of thing happened) in a copy of hebrew law we still have access today, (we can verify what how jesus used the law) with NO period correct detractors. (nothing from the time period which given all the different preists who could read and write and had access or ways to store their written works) kinda says this is more than a whimsical story treatment.

---

again you seem too dishonest or stupid to see christ in the story provided by john 8, answering your question for you. again no one disputes the meaning of this story and why the pharisees left (because they themselves were unworthy due to their own sin) which answers your query of where does the bible say the people throwing stones must be in good standing with God. HERE IN JOHN 8 moron!!! I even posted a whole sermon from a well respected 3rd party that directly answers your question in the same way I did!!! they even took it a step further and said the people throwing stones not only had to be in good standing, but WITHOUT SIN completely!!!

again you are nothing more than a troll that is desperately trying to make a show for other trolls. to everyone else you are a dishonest at best, with little to no integrity or honor. the lesson is yours sport, this is me knocking the dust from my feet.

Ah, typical Drich: paints himself into a corner and then blames others for his stupidity.

typical troll.. using off the self insults to red herring away from what he is actually trying to do.

[Angrboda]

the law also states they must be in good standing with God.

. . . .

And the 3 part of this law is the accuser must also be in good standing with God as they are commanded to purge all evil from among them. which is why jesus was writing on the ground a list of sins so great their guilt forced them to walk away.

Where is your scriptural support for this point? Since John 8 is the passage in question, you can't use John 8, as that would be circular. What scripture supports this?

I read the article you cited, and it does nothing to support your point. Perhaps you're simply not explaining it well.

If I recall right, though, the new covenant means that getting right with God simply means having faith in Jesus. Probably something a Pharisee can't accomplish, but not something they would acknowledge either. So your argument is that the law could not be carried out by persons who had sinned. I see a problem with that in that the law would never be carried out, as the New Testament makes clear, all have sinned. Yet, I suspect the law was carried out. How do you explain that paradox?

(ETA: It also occurs to me that even if the witnesses should be stoned for their sins, since Jesus is the only witness to their sin, and the law requires two witnesses, Jesus' calling out their sins was without any practical effect.)

[The Grand Nudger]

You appear to believe that these pharisees would have done anything on the say so of a new testament book, and, frankly, think that the old testament book is just wrong.  They were going to stone her in accordance with law, jesus got her off on a technicality, and that was their entire ploy to begin with, as any answer he gave would have been wrong according to mosaic law, they sought to entrap him.

the passage in john explain the entrapment in a different way.. so you are 1/2 right.. yes they said according to the law of moses we should stone her. but roman authority would not allow such an execution. which they could parlay with the roman government into having him executed for trying to execute this woman.. or if he went against the law of moses could could then be identified as a false profit. so yes your 1/2 right the answer given though cited deut 17 which again requires the person doing the stoning/the accuser to also be in good standing with God or he too would be executed. not really a loop hole. but rather the law prevented evil men from manipulating the law to get their way. which is why those men dropped their stones. as they too could be found to be 'evil' for persecuting this woman with all the sin jesus was spelling out on the ground.

Yes, the christian passage in a christian book asserts a christian concept of law and the subjugation of the pharisees to a christian god...... surprise.  You'd have to be a cultist, and conveniently are a cultist, to believe that it happened in mere reality.

  You think jesus has the right of this..but I somehow doubt that a pharisee would believe that a christian or indeed christ was the authority on their laws.   I don't see many jewish people conceding this one..and it's been centuries now....

that is because you have not read the bible. and or you do not know the ot law well enough to make this call.

So again what happened here is based on the laws provided by moses which has three parts to it. the first says a death penalty violation must be witnessed by two or more people..

Then accuser primary must be the first to throw a stone.

the law also states they must be in good standing with God.

So here is what happened: a sinful men/pharisees brought a woman before christ caught in adultery. this only satisfy 1/3 of the law's requirements for stoning. In that a capital crime/sin was witnessed by two people. here is where you and the pharisees jumped the gun. because they were charging jesus with whether or not she should die when the accuser/witness was to make that call. they did this to entrap him.

so hebrew priest violation 1. A violation Jesus quickly identifies, and afford him time to write out their own sins.

And the 3 part of this law is the accuser must also be in good standing with God as they are commanded to purge all evil from among them. which is why jesus was writing on the ground a list of sins so great their guilt forced them to walk away.

now because Jesus was in good standing with God apparently the only one there who was in full compliance with God's law. and because he did not witness the crime like the pharisees did. he released her as he who could throw a stone didn't actually witness this sin.

Yes, our trickster hero got a whore out of a jam on a technicality.  He's a friend of women, you see.  Obviously, we wouldn't want our christian god to be a dummy that gets stumped by a gaggle of elderly jewish shamans.

Plainly, it never happened -

there is far more documentation in period manuscript that says it did, than any that challenge it.

Yes, yes..we know...

but, sure, it's meant to tell a story that you would very much like to tell here.  I don't think that anyone is disagreeing that this is the story told by christians.  To you, believing him to be a god, your god, it demonstrates his intelligence and authority.  For them..if this really happened and isn't just a vehicle for theological content, he'd have been a shitbag lawyer to a criminal whore and they'd get around to dealing with him...shortly.  Christian explication on their hearts condemning them and jesus getting the actual rules actually right....is blatant propaganda.

again sport this story work so precisely with in the law with it's specific detail, no other outcome besides death could be possible if jesus did not know the hebrew laws so well. this story carefully navigates the hebrew law in away that only students of the law could fully appreciate. it is steeped with mastery and irony that you clearly you do not see. this would force any contemporary jewish rabbi in the same situation to yield the same way the Pharisees did, given the same details if they too observed the ot law as it was written. you don't seem to understand the main crux of any propaganda is there is very little truth or substance. here for anyone who has studied the OT law knows the depths the ot laws were used to "best" and humiliate these priests using the law provided by the OT. truthfully all bias aside, if this did not happen as described here, only a master rabbi could have written such a story to the extent and depth this was written. you know how some say i write in a 'gottacha' into my posts. there are at least 4 point where jesus 'got' the pharisees by using the law as it was written against them. and if you don't see that.. then youre not in a place to critique this story.

Yeah, the person who wrote it probably was somewhere between jewish and christian. : shrugs :.....?

 It would take a cultist to believe that this was a news report from the ancient front.  The story is openly whimsical, referent, and highly thematic.

but based firmly in a culture that is verified by historians, (this sort of thing happened)  in a copy of hebrew law we still have access today, (we can verify what how jesus used the law)  with NO period correct detractors. (nothing from the time period which given all the different preists who could read and write and had access or ways to store their written works) kinda says this is more than a whimsical story treatment.

The story gives itself the treatment numbskull.  It announces itself as a theological narrative vehicle.  Which is fine, completely fine.  It leads you to exactly the conclusion that christianity desires.  Mission accomplished.  Bullshitting people about it, though, is optional.  You do you, and have fun accounting for false prophecy when you meet Jeezy Creezy.  Having known you for some time, I doubt you'll fare better than the pharisees.

[Mercyvessel]

“But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” - 1 Corinthians 2:14

We could all go on and on... but after all is said and done - the contentions over perspectives, nuances, etc, etc... the irrefutable bottom line (if you care to really investigate) is that - Christian or not & believe it or not - Biblical prophecy continues to be fulfilled to the present day as people continue to deny to the very end of the age (or the end of one's time on this planet).

--------

"While it is said, Today if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation." - Hebrews 3:15

“But He gives more grace. Therefore He says: “God resists the proud, But gives grace to the humble.” – James 4:6

“Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.” - Revelation 1:7-8