Would You Stone Sinners As Required By The Bible If You Lived In Otest

[Credo in Deum]

[Credo in Deum]

:paperbag:

Edited May 31, 2014 by Credo in Deum

[dairygirl4u2c]

i have seen a couple say they would stone them as dictated. but it is still next to no one.

 

the real question then, is how is it acceptable for you to say no? if you claim to be christian and accept its history as given etc, you must be compelled to say yes.

(i personally have reservations about accepting its history, but not to get into that, but more to examine the consistency of people etc)

 

 

how could it be otherwise? and what does it say about you that you would think otherwise?

[Credo in Deum]

i have seen a couple say they would stone them as dictated. but it is still next to no one.

 

the real question then, is how is it acceptable for you to say no? if you claim to be christian and accept its history as given etc, you must be compelled to say yes.

(i personally have reservations about accepting its history, but not to get into that, but more to examine the consistency of people etc)

 

 

how could it be otherwise? and what does it say about you that you would think otherwise?

 

The real question is why do you expect Christians to follow the Torah?

[dairygirl4u2c]

i dont expect them to, today. im asking if they were a jew living in the days of the OT.

 

it is said that the bible is without error, and it says that God dictates that stuff.

Edited May 31, 2014 by dairygirl4u2c

[dairygirl4u2c]

not from others, directly from "God"

 

'Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp." So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses. (Numbers 15:32-36)'

[dairygirl4u2c]

and apparently, though i do question its accuracy history etc of this one snippet... jesus said it too. (i would guess he said it as in "if God says" as in "if" "since" "supposedly God says" etc.)

 

''Matthew 15
Then some Pharisees and teachers of the law came to Jesus from Jerusalem and asked, 2 “Why do your disciples break the tradition of the elders? They don’t wash their hands before they eat!”

3 Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? 4 For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’[a] and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’''

 

================

 

it really makes me wonder about the psychi of people who just ignore it and continue living such conservative and or fundamentalist lives. i can't help but conclude it's mostly social, psychological, culture etc causing them to be as they are.

[Dr_Asik]

This question is pretty meaningless. The death penalty was viewed as acceptable to most people of the time, and stoning was a particular way of carrying that out that was deemed acceptable by Jews of time and codified as law. Therefore, if I or anyone else lived in that society at that time, it is likely we would view it as acceptable. We simply wouldn't have access to our current-day ideas about human dignity and compassion, so it is unlikely we would find good reason to deem it immoral. Mentalities change.

 

If however the question is whether my present self, teleported back in time, would agree with stoning people to death, then the answer is different but equally obvious: no, because my 2000 A.D.-era sensibilities would apply.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Dr_Asik

[dairygirl4u2c]

but it says that God ordered it, so how could you oppose doing it?

 

that sort of argument might work for explaining why women don't have to wear hats in church, as the new testament paul said, but it doesn't work too well for this.

 

is God pro using the death penalty for stupid sh** but we aren't? don't we have to follow God?

 

if God is willing to kill people for that stuff, doesn't that mean it's not wrong to kill them? or in fact mean it's the right thing to do? or that the crimes deserve the death penalty? i mean 'deserves death' in a detached since, maybe, but actually killing someone?

[Credo in Deum]

but it says that God ordered it, so how could you oppose doing it?

 

that sort of argument might work for explaining why women don't have to wear hats in church, as the new testament paul said, but it doesn't work too well for this.

 

is God pro using the death penalty for stupid sh** but we aren't? don't we have to follow God?

 

if God is willing to kill people for that stuff, doesn't that mean it's not wrong to kill them? or in fact mean it's the right thing to do? or that the crimes deserve the death penalty? i mean 'deserves death' in a detached since, maybe, but actually killing someone?

 

You might find this helpful.

 

http://www.umdcatholic.org/Northern%20Cross/OldTestamentLaws.pdf

[dairygirl4u2c]

again, i dont have issue with why we dont follow the OT laws now. i have issue with why wouldnt you folks as a jew living in the OT days stone people?

[Credo in Deum]

I can't speak for the others.  If I was a Jew back then, then I would follow the Torah. 

[Perigrina]

i have seen a couple say they would stone them as dictated. but it is still next to no one.

 

the real question then, is how is it acceptable for you to say no? if you claim to be christian and accept its history as given etc, you must be compelled to say yes.

(i personally have reservations about accepting its history, but not to get into that, but more to examine the consistency of people etc)

 

 

how could it be otherwise? and what does it say about you that you would think otherwise?

 

 

This is why people do not like the question, because either answer feels wrong.  It is quite similar to an incident in the life of Christ.  People brought a woman to Him and she was someone to whom the stoning penalty applied.  They were trying to trap Him because He would look bad if He said to obey the Law but He would also look bad if He said to stone her.  As you may recall, He did not answer the question directly.  So it is not so surprising that people do not want to answer you.  

[Dr_Asik]

is God pro using the death penalty for stupid sh** but we aren't? don't we have to follow God?

 

if God is willing to kill people for that stuff, doesn't that mean it's not wrong to kill them? or in fact mean it's the right thing to do? or that the crimes deserve the death penalty? i mean 'deserves death' in a detached since, maybe, but actually killing someone?

 

Present-day Jews and certainly all Christians would agree that God doesn't actually encourage lapidation. But God doesn't change his mind. So how come it's written in Leviticus that God ordered Jews to stone people for certain crimes? I guess there are basically two ways to go about answering this:

 

 - The Jews were widely paraphrasing God when writing Leviticus. God might have said something to the effect of "Worshipping other deities is abhorrent to me", and then the Jews codified that into a set of precise rules and punishements in accordance to the mentalities of their time. That meant stoning people that commited the worst offences. So God never ordered a cruel punishment, but that's how the Jews interpreted His commands.

 

 - God actually told the Jews to stone people to death for the worst offenses, but only for temporary and pedagogical purposes, i.e. that was the only way Jews of the time would have understood that he was really serious about it. Later, God sent Jesus to give out better moral principles and evolve beyond this temporary set of laws.

 

Regardless, in both cases, it was morally right for a Jew of the time to stone people to death for certain offenses, either in a relative sense because that was considered moral at the time, or in an absolute sense because that was what God actually told them to do. I personally lean towards the first explanation because I find it repugnant that God could actually order acts of cruelty, but I don't exclude that possibility because if God orders something then that makes it morally right, if only in that specific case. I don't think we need to go into that debate however, because the first explanation is perfectly acceptable and presents much fewer difficulties.

Edited May 31, 2014 by Dr_Asik

[Credo in Deum]

 

Regardless, in both cases, it was morally right for a Jew of the time to stone people to death for certain offenses, either in a relative sense because that was considered moral at the time, or in an absolute sense because that was what God actually told them to do. I personally lean towards the first explanation because I find it repugnant that God could actually order acts of cruelty, but I don't exclude that possibility because if God orders something then that makes it morally right, if only in that specific case. I don't think we need to go into that debate however, because the first explanation is perfectly acceptable and presents much fewer difficulties.

 

For me I think if we could see the effects of sin then we would probably see the death penalty as an act of mercy and maybe it was to the Old Testament Jews. Like today, some think it is unfair to spend an eternity in Hell for one mortal sin.   I just look at it as we do not fully comprehend the utter depravity and seriousness of sin, which is why we cannot at the present time understand God's ways of dealing with obstinate sinners.