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 ...?

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 50 by bluethread]

Christianity is the New Israel.

My hypothetical wife is a Christian.

She is under the "Deal" the Israelites/Jews made with their mythological deity.

Bring out the lead and stones.

[bluethread]

[Replying to post 50 by bluethread]

Christianity is the New Israel.

According to whom? If you believe that to be the case, then please make the case. Where in the bible does it say this?

My hypothetical wife is a Christian.

It appears that your hypothetical wife believes in or is associated with replacement theology. I do not see that supported in the bible and neither do a large portion of those who call themselves "Christian".

She is under the "Deal" the Israelites/Jews made with their mythological deity.

Not according to those who believe in replacement theology. They say that they are subject to the "new covenant", which they take to mean personal revelation, with "love your neighbor as yourself" being the only binding commandment. That said, I do agree that those who claim to follow Yeshua should accept the Covenant that Yeshua said He did not come to abolish. They do not recognize that Yermeyahu clearly states that he was talking to Israel and Yehudah, when he spoke of the "new covenant" and that "new covenant" was that HaTorah would be written on their hearts, as Moshe' also told them in his farewell address.

Bring out the lead and stones.

Again, I see nothing in the Scriptures about lead. Also, unless she has affirmatively accepted the actual Covenant and you are living in a Hasidic community in Israel, I do not think the governing authorities would permit it. Even then, I think you will have a problem with the secular government of Israel.

[tam]

Peace to you,

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 ...?

Are you also a Christian in this scenario?


If you are not, then why in the world would you care what rules she may or may not be subject to? Why would you participate in a system you do not believe in to begin with?


If you are, then your obligation as a Christian is to follow and obey Christ.



My Lord saved the life of the woman brought to Him for adultery, to see what He would tell them about stoning her (as they claimed Moses commanded to be done). Instead of encouraging or even demanding that they stone her, He told them 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone', and in doing so He saved her life.

He even said,

"Neither do I condemn you."



So there you have an actual example of a capital offense; and the words that Christ spoke about it.


He also emphasized on more than one occasion that "God desires mercy, not sacrifice" (Hosea 6:6). He even told the Pharisees to go and learn what that means. (Matthew 9:13)


He did not demand life for life when He was falsely accused and persecuted and beaten and put to death. He could have done so according, but He fulfilled and even surpassed the written law with love, and against love there is no law (Galatians 5:22, 23).

Love is the law of the new covenant, the law that is written upon the heart.

My Lord even asked forgiveness for those who had wronged Him, and teaches us to do the same, so that we may be sons of our Father in heaven (Matt 5:44, 45). He also told us NOT to judge. "Judge not or you will BE judged".




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Tcg]

My Lord saved the life of the woman brought to Him for adultery, to see what He would tell them about stoning her (as they claimed Moses commanded to be done).

Actually, this is what the law states:

Leviticus 20:10 If a man commits adultery with another mans wife"with the wife of his neighbor"both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death."

Instead of encouraging or even demanding that they stone her, He told them 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone',

Nope. That's not what he said. If he had said that, he'd have to cast the first stone or else admit that he wasn't "without sin".

Here is what he actually said:

John 8:7b - "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

Jesus revealed that fact that this was a setup and that they were not following Jesus' law. If they had been, both the man and the woman would have been presented for stoning.

There was none among them who was without sin because they all played a part in this setup.

Details like this must be payed attention to or one will come away with a complete misunderstanding of what Jesus taught here.

[tam]

Peace to you,

My Lord saved the life of the woman brought to Him for adultery, to see what He would tell them about stoning her (as they claimed Moses commanded to be done).

Actually, this is what the law states:

Leviticus 20:10 If a man commits adultery with another mans wife"with the wife of his neighbor"both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death."

This does not change the point that the people claimed Moses told them to put such women to death.

Instead of encouraging or even demanding that they stone her, He told them 'let he who is without sin cast the first stone',

Nope. That's not what he said. If he had said that, he'd have to cast the first stone or else admit that he wasn't "without sin".

He would not have to cast the first stone, He simply could cast the first stone.

Or He could show her mercy. (Hosea 6:6; Matt 9:13)

Here is what he actually said:

John 8:7b - "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

Yes, well, they were the ones bringing her to be stoned after all.

Jesus revealed that fact that this was a setup and that they were not following Jesus' law. If they had been, both the man and the woman would have been presented for stoning.

There was none among them who was without sin because they all played a part in this setup.

There was none among them who was without sin, period.

This ties into 'judge not lest you be judged'.

Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Matt 7:2

Details like this must be payed attention to or one will come away with a complete misunderstanding of what Jesus taught here.

So you think that if they had brought the man (or men) as well, that He would have said, sure go ahead and stone them?


Because "Let he who is without sin among you cast the first stone' would still have applied in that situation. Indeed, if He meant what you are saying, then there would not have been much of a trap for Him to have to overcome; He could simply have repeated the law back to them and told them that they were in violation of it, yes?



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Tcg]

Peace to you,

My Lord saved the life of the woman brought to Him for adultery, to see what He would tell them about stoning her (as they claimed Moses commanded to be done).

Actually, this is what the law states:

Leviticus 20:10 If a man commits adultery with another mans wife"with the wife of his neighbor"both the adulterer and the adulteress are to be put to death."

This does not change the point that the people claimed Moses told them to put such women to death.

I'm not sure why you think I implied it would.

This is simply the beginning of the setup. This fact supports my point.

They lied from the beginning. Jesus didn't reject his earlier co-authored law, he simply revealed that those who tried to get him to approve of stoning in this case, had presented an invalid case.

They misrepresented Jesus' law and then further disobeyed it by not presenting the man as well as the woman to be stoned.

His action revealed that stoning in this single situation would not be according to his law.

He didn't reject stoning, only it's application in this case.

[jgh7]

I've struggled with this topic of the literalness of the Law. It seems that the Law has been changed. While it still shows right and wrong, we simply ignore the punishment it demands for it.

ex) adultery is still wrong now just as it was then

But it seems Jesus changed the punishment. Namely by doing a polar opposite of completely forgiving rather than stoning to death in the case of adultery which the original Law commanded be done. While I'm glad this is the case, it still does confuse me because a part of me does view it as completely changing the Law. Take violating the Sabbath for example. It seems that God was not always for mercy. In the beginning with His people, it seems He was for a highly literal following of His Law as can be seen in the following passage.

Numbers 15:32-36
Penalty for Violating the Sabbath
32 Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. 33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. 34 They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.
35 Then the Lord said to Moses, The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp. 36 So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died.

[tam]

[Replying to post 57 by jgh7]

Peace to you jgh7,


Some things about the law (as written in the OT) that might help you in your struggle and search:


1 - Some laws were not true from the beginning, but Moses gave them to the people because their hearts were hard. Such as the law on divorce.

"Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning." Matt 19:8

Christ then proceeded to tell them the truth on the matter.


So exceptions were made in the law due to the hard hearts of the people.


2 - Jeremiah 8:8:

"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of [the LORD]," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?"



Not everything in the law is written accurately or accurately relates what the people were meant to learn and to DO. But we have Christ to teach us the truth (since He is Himself the Truth). If we are disciples of Christ, then we are to listen to Him.


And I mean, if the teachers of the law and the scribes (and the people) had had everything accurate to begin with, then what need would there have been for Christ to come and correct things, to bear witness to the truth, and to show us the Father?


He even said 'woe to you teachers of the law' and woe to you scribes'.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[bluethread]

1 - Some laws were not true from the beginning, but Moses gave them to the people because their hearts were hard. Such as the law on divorce.

"Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning." Matt 19:8

Christ then proceeded to tell them the truth on the matter.

So exceptions were made in the law due to the hard hearts of the people.

Yeshua is not making an exception. What Yeshua said was Moshe' permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away. Emphasis mine There is no commandment to get a divorce. The commandment is that, IF one gets a divorce, the divorce must be put in writing. What Yeshua did was make the commandment stronger by saying that simply putting it in writing is not enough, it also must be for cause, specifically adultery.

2 - Jeremiah 8:8:

"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of [the LORD]," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?"


Not everything in the law is written accurately or accurately relates what the people were meant to learn and to DO. But we have Christ to teach us the truth (since He is Himself the Truth). If we are disciples of Christ, then we are to listen to Him.

And I mean, if the teachers of the law and the scribes (and the people) had had everything accurate to begin with, then what need would there have been for Christ to come and correct things, to bear witness to the truth, and to show us the Father?

He even said 'woe to you teachers of the law' and woe to you scribes'.

Yeremiyahu does not specify what he was referring to when he speaks of "the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely". However, it appears that the problem was that commandments were being ignored, not added. I see nowhere in the accounts of Yeshua, or even in the writings of His disciples, where they say that anything in HaTorah was not accurate. The "you have heard it said", seems to refer to how HaTorah had been interpreted by the teachers of the law.

You are wrong in saying Yeshua could have caste the first stone. The absence of the man is just one of several irregularities in that case. One such irregularity is the lack of witnesses willing to step forward. It is they who were to caste the first stones. Yeshua could not have legally caste a stone, because He was not a witness.

This ties into 'judge not lest you be judged'.

Do not judge, or you will be judged. For with the same judgment you pronounce, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." Matt 7:2

If this means what you are implying, then there could be no courts at all. He is speaking of personal, not legal, judgment. That is the point of the last exchange, Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you(legally)? . . .
Then neither do I condemn you,(legally and personally). Legally, because He was not a witness, and personally, because, according to the second greatest commandment, "Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself".

So you think that if they had brought the man (or men) as well, that He would have said, sure go ahead and stone them?

Because "Let he who is without sin among you cast the first stone' would still have applied in that situation. Indeed, if He meant what you are saying, then there would not have been much of a trap for Him to have to overcome; He could simply have repeated the law back to them and told them that they were in violation of it, yes?

No, because it would still be in violation of the law. Regarding your final question, that is precisely what He was doing when He said, "He is without sin, caste the first stone." That also might be what He was writing on the ground. It would have been clear to at least the teachers, if not the entire crowd, that the witnesses, who were the ones to caste the first stone, had not been properly examined and, in throwing the stone, were placing themselves at risk of being stoned, if they were committing perjury.

[tam]

Peace to you,

1 - Some laws were not true from the beginning, but Moses gave them to the people because their hearts were hard. Such as the law on divorce.

"Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning." Matt 19:8

Christ then proceeded to tell them the truth on the matter.

So exceptions were made in the law due to the hard hearts of the people.

Yeshua is not making an exception.

I did not say that Jaheshua made an exception.

I said that exception were made in the law due to the hard hearts of the people. Moses made an allowance for the people because their hearts were hard.

Moshe' permitted a man to write a certificate of divorce and send her away. Emphasis mine

Yes. MOSES permitted this; Moses made this allowance for the people due because their hearts were hard.

There is no commandment to get a divorce.

Correct. I never suggested otherwise.

The commandment is that, IF one gets a divorce, the divorce must be put in writing.

This is an allowance that Moses made for the people.

What Yeshua did was make the commandment stronger by saying that simply putting it in writing is not enough, it also must be for cause, specifically adultery.

What Jaheshua did was state the truth; truth as it is from the beginning, making no exceptions or allowances to the truth.

2 - Jeremiah 8:8:

"'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of [the LORD]," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely?"


Not everything in the law is written accurately or accurately relates what the people were meant to learn and to DO. But we have Christ to teach us the truth (since He is Himself the Truth). If we are disciples of Christ, then we are to listen to Him.

And I mean, if the teachers of the law and the scribes (and the people) had had everything accurate to begin with, then what need would there have been for Christ to come and correct things, to bear witness to the truth, and to show us the Father?

He even said 'woe to you teachers of the law' and woe to you scribes'.

Yeremiyahu does not specify what he was referring to when he speaks of "the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely".

He is referring to the law of JAH (which they say they are wise for having); and yet that law has been mishandled.

However, it appears that the problem was that commandments were being ignored, not added. I see nowhere in the accounts of Yeshua, or even in the writings of His disciples, where they say that anything in HaTorah was not accurate. The "you have heard it said", seems to refer to how HaTorah had been interpreted by the teachers of the law.

Scribes and pens relate to something written. Whether that is adding TO or taking away FROM.


The rest of what you wrote has to do with a different post, so I will respond in a separate post so as not to potentially confuse the issue.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy