Would you stone the man described in Numbers 15?

[Jagella]

Consider this story from Numbers 15:32-36(NRSV):

When the Israelites were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the sabbath day. Those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses, Aaron, and to the whole congregation. They put him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him outside the camp.� The whole congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death, just as the Lord had commanded Moses.

Question for Debate: If you were there with these Israelites, would you stone this man in obedience to Moses and to Yahweh?

Keep in mind that this man may have been gathering sticks to build a fire to cook for for his family and to keep them warm. After the Bible god had him killed, any wife he had would be left a widow and any children he had would be left without a father to provide for them. They would be left cold, hungry, and facing poverty. Any friends he had among the Israelites would be obligated to kill their friend.

Despite these consequences of Yahweh's order to stone the man to death, all the Jews and by extension all Christians coming later must obey the Bible god. Any objections you have to this cruel act are nothing to Yahweh and may even result in a similar punishment for disobedience to him. You have a god you must believe in and obey without question and without reason.

I predict that few if any of the Christians here will answer this question honestly and sensibly. To post such an answer is to expose Christian beliefs for what they are.

[William]

[Replying to post 149 by Jagella]

Psychopathy is traditionally a personality disorder characterized by persistent antisocial behavior, impaired empathy and remorse, and bold, disinhibited, and egotistical traits.

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

What are today's tribal/social rules on how to deal with such individuals?

[Zzyzx]

.

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

Isn't there a story about the same tribe killing by crucifixion another man who 'thumbed his nose at the tribal rules'?

[Wootah]

I still offer to head to head debate anyone on this topic.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 149 by Jagella]

Psychopathy is traditionally a personality disorder characterized by persistent antisocial behavior, impaired empathy and remorse, and bold, disinhibited, and egotistical traits.

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

But "the tribe" didn't make this decision, at least not according to the story. Supposedly, God made the call to murder this man.


That of course leads us to wonder who was claiming to speak for God and what they had against this poor man. What a wonderous position for a psychopath to have. Carte blanche to commit outright murder with no repercussions because after all, God speaks through them.




Tcg

[rikuoamero]

I still offer to head to head debate anyone on this topic.

Then post a H2H request in the relevant sub-forum.

[rikuoamero]

.

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

Isn't there a story about the same tribe killing by crucifixion another man who 'thumbed his nose at the tribal rules'?

Indeed. I don't see how the Christians here have any leg at all to stand on. We've had people equating the violation of the Sabbath/picking up sticks with genocide and treason. We've had people making arguments along the line that one Hebrew man doing so could have led to a loss of favour from God, lose his protection and blessings etc.
However, when it comes to Jesus, the reaction by the Jewish priestly authorities of the day towards Jesus more or less matches what I see here by the Christians. Those priests would have been horrified at what Jesus was (supposedly) doing. They would have seen a Jewish man thumbing his nose at long-standing tribal rules, laws given by God Himself and been terrified at the thought of God turning his back on the Hebrews, and so they would have sought (as the Gospels say) to kill this man.
I'd like the Christians - were the Jewish priests right in their seeking of Jesus's death? In my opinion...no, but I want to hear what the Christians think. At the moment, all I'm seeing is a group of people (whether the Jewish priests of old, or Christians) saying they hope or aim to win God's favour by killing someone.

[Jagella]

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

We're not given the details of the victim's reasons for gathering the sticks or how his murderers saw him. In any case, the story is probably a fable written to scare the Jews into obeying the Jewish leaders.

What are today's tribal/social rules on how to deal with such individuals?

I don't know how modern Jews deal with Sabbath-law breakers, but secular governments nowadays do not allow religions to stone to death people who violate their religious rules.

[William]

[Replying to post 156 by Jagella]

We're not given the details of the victim's reasons for gathering the sticks or how his murderers saw him. In any case, the story is probably a fable written to scare the Jews into obeying the Jewish leaders.

So are you saying that this particular tribe of people never actually had a Law which allowed for such a punishment to be carried out by the tribe itself?

I don't know how modern Jews deal with Sabbath-law breakers,...

Perhaps you should research that as well then?

...but secular governments nowadays do not allow religions to stone to death people who violate their religious rules.

Indeed. Do you have any example of this idea of a 'secular government' you write of?

I would be very interested in looking into that.

My main points of argument throughout this thread have been;

1: 'The Tribe' (secular or otherwise) is generally run by making people agree to observe its rules and dealing with those who do not, through the authority of the Tribes power to administer penalty on the offenders any way they see fit and reasonable.

2: That one does not need to invoke any idea of a GOD as the overall authority and rule-maker in order to accomplish that. The Tribes authority alone will and does suffice.

3: Ancient Tribal customs, secular or otherwise, were generally violent and overboard by comparison to modern ones. What we in the modern world know now as 'better' was not learned any other way.

4: Any Christians who say they would act in accordance with Ancient Tribal Rules of Israel rather than against them are not necessarily saying they would act that way today, given the chance to do it. Some are saying that and some are not.

Atheist Receives Death Threats After Ten Commandments Decision

5: Every Tribe no matter what they base their rules and regulation on, are going to encounter problems re 'rebellious boat-rockers'. How would a non-theist Tribe go about dealing with the problem of theists?

[William]

[Replying to post 151 by Zzyzx]

Perhaps the tribe saw this in the man thumbing his nose at the Tribal Rules and decided the best course of action was to stone him to death?

Isn't there a story about the same tribe killing by crucifixion another man who 'thumbed his nose at the tribal rules'?

I think the story is about 2 tribes working together to achieve that end.

The man thumbed his nose at the idea that 'man was made for the sabbath' as I pointed out in previous posts. I think maybe even the man was accused of working on the sabbath, but whether there was mention of any rocks being held in ready by his accusers, I do not recall...

[PinSeeker]

[Replying to post 147 by PinSeeker]

That implies that there are those who do not intend to make peace, but (putting it mildly) stir controversy and cause discord. And that would seem to be the case with you.

You say that as if it's in any way comparable to stating one is willing to bash a man's skull in with heavy rocks simply because one believes a god has commanded it.

No, I say that as if it's in any way comparable -- and it is -- to punishng a person for any crime. You may say the violating the Sabbath doesn't rise to that level. And it doesn't today, because violating the Sabbath is not a crime today, nor should it be. Thus, as I have said, I would not approve of it... today. But that was the case in those days, and a heinous crime it was. Thus, as I have said many times, I would have approved of it, albeit very sadly, were I alive and part of Israel 2500 years ago. As for today, it still is an offense against God, and therefore sin, but not punishable by the state by rule of law.

Do you consider yourself one of the "peacemakers" from that beatitude?

Not all the time, for sure. I am -- like you and every other human being besides Jesus who has ever or ever will walk this planet (before He returns, of course) -- a filthy, rotten sinner. And for that, like Job, I repent in dust and ashes. But thanks be to God, because of my repentance and belief, I am a redeemed sinner. Still a sinner, just like you, but therefore struggling to put off the old man and put on the new (as Paul puts it). Maybe you will be one day, too; I hope so.