Should I Have My New Wife Stoned to Death ...?

[StuartJ]

My new Christian wife recently broke ten (10) biblical laws.

One Sabbath, she put on my shirt and jeans (1) - the shirt was wool and the jeans cotton (2) and headed into town while she was menstruating (3). On the way, she picked up some sticks for the bbq (4) and cooked up a mess of cheeseburgers (5) and calamari (6) then let it slip that she had slept with other guys before we married (7).

One of the guys was at the bbq, and when I got into a brawl with him my wife rushed up and grabbed him forcibly by the testicles (8). She then turned and abused her parents who had tried to intervene (9) and took Yahweh's name in vain during her tirade (10).

If Jesus is "God", he was co-author of these biblical laws in the first place and did not rescind them during his visit to this planet ... and we shouldn't try to dodge the ones we just don't like anymore.

So, should I take my new wife before the elder men of my people and - in true biblical tradition - have her stoned to death ...?

[Tcg]

Unsupported faith based belief statements are as equally useless as unsupported claims are.

Then feel free to ignore them and move right along.

Given that I am a fellow member in good standing of this forum, I'll choose to either ignore your posts or examine them in great detail.

When I do choose to examine your posts and find what I determine are glaring deficiencies, as a member in good standing, I'll exercise my freedom to point out those to fellow members and other readers.

Given that to seem to think you have the right to order me to "move right along", I'll challenge you to present what right you think you have to make such a command to a fellow member in good standing.

[JehovahsWitness]

TCG answered you when he quoted Matthew 5:17.

The realisation is that we violate all the laws nearly all the time and deserve death but God will redeem those that call on Jesus to pay for their sins.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Don't you think it comes down to what Matthew 5:17 means? ie how this passage can reasonably be understood?


JW

[StuartJ]

...So, should I take my new wife before the elder men of my people and - in true biblical tradition - have her stoned to death ...?

Are you a Jew? Are you a judge, set by God so that you could judge according to the rules Bible gives for judges? Do you know even the rules that were given to judges that were set by God? Are there at least two witnesses? If your answer is yes to all, judge as you would like to be judged, if it is found that you have done something against the law.

Thank you for addressing the topic directly and concisely.

No, I'm neither Jewish nor a judge.

That is why I am asking for guidance here ....

And yes, there were quite a few witnesses at the bbq.

[otseng]

Well, ignoring a recent attempt to distort my previous reply, according to Jesus, the answer is no one.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid accusing another of distorting a reply.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[StuartJ]

Well, ignoring a recent attempt to distort my previous reply, according to Jesus, the answer is no one.

Moderator Comment

Please avoid accusing another of distorting a reply.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster. Any challenges or replies to moderator postings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

It looked blatant to me too ...

And from the same person of faith I caught/accused distorting my OP in "Hear the Pennies Fall".

I suggest this behaviour is blatantly dishonest.

And I further suggest that the responses have been very moderate and civil.

And I repeat my concern that I have trouble trusting people of faith when it comes to matters of faith.

The soft option is to ban those who speak up against it ... or burn them at the stake in Jesus' mighty name.

[Tcg]

TCG answered you when he quoted Matthew 5:17.

The realisation is that we violate all the laws nearly all the time and deserve death but God will redeem those that call on Jesus to pay for their sins.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Don't you think it comes down to what Matthew 5:17 means? ie how this passage can reasonably be understood?


JW

If you want to generate a discussion of what I said, you'll need to refer to post 5.

Here is the heart of that post:

"Jesus not only co-authored these biblical laws, he made it clear that they will remain in effect until heaven and earth pass away.

Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. 18 For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished." "

Please note that I quoted Matthew 5:17 and Matthew 5:18.

It is essential to include Matthew 5:18 when discussing Matthew 5:17 as it gives us a very clear timeline as to when the Law will be nullified.

Matthew 5:18 clearly states this will not happen "until heaven and earth pass away".

This phrase would normally be taken to mean, "never" and that is clearly a possible meaning. Of course if you read Revelation carefully, you'll find a claim that this present heaven and earth will pass away. I suppose one could point to that future event as the time referred to.

In either case, it is clear that it is still in effect now. That is the key point I intended to point out by including Matthew 5:18 in my quotation contained in post 5.

[Wootah]

TCG answered you when he quoted Matthew 5:17.

The realisation is that we violate all the laws nearly all the time and deserve death but God will redeem those that call on Jesus to pay for their sins.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Don't you think it comes down to what Matthew 5:17 means? ie how this passage can reasonably be understood?


JW

How so?

[bluethread]

No, I'm neither Jewish nor a judge.

That is why I am asking for guidance here ....

And yes, there were quite a few witnesses at the bbq.

It is to be remembered that we are talking about a covenant here. Unless one is a party to that covenant, which you appear to be saying you are not, or you live in a society of people who do, you have no obligation to that covenant. The next question is what you mean by "Christian wife". Is she a party to the covenant and live in a community of people who are also parties to that covenant? If the answer to these is yes, then, unless you do not believe in the rule of law, she would be subject to the laws of that covenant, to the extent that it is permitted by a restraining authority, i.e. a government with a differing covenant. In that case, she would be subject to the laws of that government, some of which would no doubt be as objectionable to you as those you mentioned in the OP.

In short, you have no obligation, because you are not a party to the covenant and the two of you do not live in an unrestrained society of people who are parties to that covenant. However, under the laws of these United States, the people of that society are free to follow the jurisprudence of their covenant and, if it is determined that she is guilty of those offences, threat her as if she were dead.

Now, if you would like to discuss Torah jurisprudence and how each of the commandments you eluded to work within a Torah submissive society, I would be happy to discuss that with you. However, discussing these commandments outside of the context of that particular covenant, would make no more sense than attempting to enforce Canadian "hate speech" laws in these United States. I use this example, because a Canadian once threatened to call the police, when I scolded his daughter for handling a can of beer in public. When I mentioned this to a local police officer, he said that the I should have told him to go right ahead and do that, because the officer would have then informed the man that he was no longer in Canada.

[1213]

No, I'm neither Jewish nor a judge.

Then I have to wonder, why you ask, if you are not even a Jew? Why follow their rules, if you are not a Jew? And if you admit that you are not judge, why do you want to judge?

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 38 by bluethread]

You didn't mention forgiveness, and mercy and love ...

You went on and on about "laws".

It was only some godforsaken Atheist who wrote earlier that I should probably spare her.

If I answered YES to your points ...

Should we be true biblicists and have her stoned to death ...?

Or should we find "scriptural" loopholes to wriggle out of what are the barbaric, primitive laws of barbaric, primitive, superstitious, bigoted men ...?

Or shall we just continue to pretend that the "laws" came from "God" on Mt. Sinai without a tiny scrap of evidence to back that fantastical notion up ...?