What is the greater evil?

[Elijah John]

What is the greater evil, picking up sticks on the Sabbath? Or Stoning that person to death for doing so?

[Zzyzx]

It is not killing people for picking sticks. It is killing people for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. A very important distinction in my opinion.

What is the difference between picking up sticks one minute before the Sabbath began vs. one minute after?

Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

Is it a very important distinction if I turn my steering wheel an inch, over and above another inch? Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road.

If you make a mistake driving Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

If it is intentional, then potentially yes.

Kindly cite a statute / law that prescribes a death penalty for a driving mistake.

Tangled webs

[Dimmesdale]

It is not killing people for picking sticks. It is killing people for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. A very important distinction in my opinion.

What is the difference between picking up sticks one minute before the Sabbath began vs. one minute after?

Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

Is it a very important distinction if I turn my steering wheel an inch, over and above another inch? Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road.

If you make a mistake driving Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

If it is intentional, then potentially yes.

Kindly cite a statute / law that prescribes a death penalty for a driving mistake.

Tangled webs

Not a mistake. An intentional decision to mow down a pedestrian, for example.

[Zzyzx]

It is not killing people for picking sticks. It is killing people for picking up sticks on the Sabbath. A very important distinction in my opinion.

What is the difference between picking up sticks one minute before the Sabbath began vs. one minute after?

Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

Is it a very important distinction if I turn my steering wheel an inch, over and above another inch? Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road.

If you make a mistake driving Is that difference worthy of a death penalty?

If it is intentional, then potentially yes.

Kindly cite a statute / law that prescribes a death penalty for a driving mistake.

Not a mistake. An intentional decision to mow down a pedestrian, for example.

What part of 'cite a statue / law' is difficult to understand?

Read what you posted: "Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road."

Where does that say anything about 'intentional decision to mow down a pedestrian'?

Tangled webs get more tangled. Let's keep this up and see how ridiculous the excuses can become

[Dimmesdale]

Read what you posted: "Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road."

Where does that say anything about 'intentional decision to mow down a pedestrian'?

Tangled webs get more tangled. Let's keep this up and see how ridiculous the excuses can become

No, I meant murder, not a mistake. Originally.

All it takes to murder on the road, is a gentle swerve of the wheel.

Actions have consequences. Just so, the consequences of picking up sticks on the Sabbath, in ancient Israel, was.... not death, but blasphemy of God.

And Aquinas said that blasphemy was worse than murder.

Blasphemy itself means to INJURE. Hence, it can be compared to killing itself. Murder itself and worse.

[Zzyzx]

Read what you posted: "Maybe I am in the middle of dense traffic and have to intricately wade through a lot of cars. Perhaps an inch is the difference between life and death for a person who happens to come next to me on the road."

Where does that say anything about 'intentional decision to mow down a pedestrian'?

Tangled webs get more tangled. Let's keep this up and see how ridiculous the excuses can become

No, I meant murder, not a mistake. Originally.

All it takes to murder on the road, is a gentle swerve of the wheel.

Are you now equating picking up sticks to murder? And a 'gentle swerve of the wheel' to running over pedestrians or other drivers?

That is quite a creative dance trying to justify an irrational death sentence for picking up sticks.

Thank you for giving readers a religious perspective on the matter.

Actions have consequences. Just so, the consequences of picking up sticks on the Sabbath, in ancient Israel, was.... not death, but blasphemy of God.

And Aquinas said that blasphemy was worse than murder.

Blasphemy itself means to INJURE. Hence, it can be compared to killing itself. Murder itself and worse.

Correction: blasphemy is defined as: the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence for God accused of blasphemy : the act of claiming the attributes of a deity for a mere man to suggest that he was … divine could only be viewed … as blasphemy— John Bright †1889 : irreverence toward something considered sacred or inviolable /www.merriam-webster.com

Do you wish to change the definition to better suit whatever you are trying to defend?

Apologist attempts to justify that death sentence are very helpful in demonstrating the irrationality of worship systems based on ancient tales about invisible, undetectable, supernatural entities.

Many when finding themselves in a hole seem intent on continuing to dig.

Let's also consider the irrationality of claiming that an entity capable of creating the universe would be concerned about someone on a minor planet picking up sticks.

Doesn't the tale of death for picking up sticks seem more likely to have been invented by priests claiming a mandate from 'god' to enhance their power over people?

[Mithrae]

Are you now equating picking up sticks to murder? And a 'gentle swerve of the wheel' to running over pedestrians or other drivers?

That is quite a creative dance trying to justify an irrational death sentence for picking up sticks.

In fairness the initial, most common, most obvious and still ongoing false equivalency to be found in this thread is the constant refrain of "picking up sticks." Four times in your post alone!

According to the story this man like the other Israelites had been rescued from slavery, seen numerous astounding miracles and, when offered the opportunity to enter into a covenant with the Israelite deity and remain part of the people set apart for Him, had actively agreed to the terms of that covenant (Exodus 24:7). Not only that, but as an ongoing reminder they had more recently been warned that "if just one person sins unintentionally, that person must bring a year-old female goat for a sin offering... that person will be forgiven. . . . . But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or foreigner, blasphemes the Lord and must be cut off from the people of Israel. Because they have despised the Lord’s word and broken his commands, they must surely be cut off; their guilt remains on them" (Numbers 15:27-31). It's not clear how soon afterwards the Sabbath-breaker story of verses 32-36 supposedly took place.

Endlessly chanting that this guy was killed "for picking up sticks" is on about the same level of accuracy and honesty as saying that Thorin was angry at Bilbo Baggins for giving away a trinket.

To then turn around and try to take someone else to task for their reciprocal false equivalency - their attempt to correct your error and point out that the story portrays a rather more serious infraction than "picking up sticks" - seems a little short-sighted.

[Elijah John]

Are you now equating picking up sticks to murder? And a 'gentle swerve of the wheel' to running over pedestrians or other drivers?

That is quite a creative dance trying to justify an irrational death sentence for picking up sticks.

In fairness the initial, most common, most obvious and still ongoing false equivalency to be found in this thread is the constant refrain of "picking up sticks." Four times in your post alone!

According to the story this man like the other Israelites had been rescued from slavery, seen numerous astounding miracles and, when offered the opportunity to enter into a covenant with the Israelite deity and remain part of the people set apart for Him, had actively agreed to the terms of that covenant (Exodus 24:7). Not only that, but as an ongoing reminder they had more recently been warned that "if just one person sins unintentionally, that person must bring a year-old female goat for a sin offering... that person will be forgiven. . . . . But anyone who sins defiantly, whether native-born or foreigner, blasphemes the Lord and must be cut off from the people of Israel. Because they have despised the Lord’s word and broken his commands, they must surely be cut off; their guilt remains on them" (Numbers 15:27-31). It's not clear how soon afterwards the Sabbath-breaker story of verses 32-36 supposedly took place.

Endlessly chanting that this guy was killed "for picking up sticks" is on about the same level of accuracy and honesty as saying that Thorin was angry at Bilbo Baggins for giving away a trinket.

To then turn around and try to take someone else to task for their reciprocal false equivalency - their attempt to correct your error and point out that the story portrays a rather more serious infraction than "picking up sticks" - seems a little short-sighted.

Does "cut off" necessarily mean the death penalty? I think not. More likely it means exile. Also, is there any indication in the story that the Sabbath breaker did so "defiantly"?

Either way it still seems an atrocity to kill someone for this. Especially via the especially cruel method of stoning. Is that the only way the Ancients knew for applying the death penalty?

[Mithrae]

Does "cut off" necessarily mean the death penalty? I think not. More likely it means exile.

That's how I would read it also, which is one of the reasons I think 1213 is probably correct in pointing out that this follow-up story "was special judgment for that person" (post #109). But the point is that he had agreed to honour the Sabbath - which explicitly included not even picking up food/mana from the ground, let alone chopping firewood - and unlike most of us had actively consented to the legal system of which that regulation was a part, and had been more recently reminded of the seriousness with which wilful violation of that system was going to be viewed.

Also, is there any indication in the story that the Sabbath breaker did so "defiantly"?

Yes, the fact that he wasn't allowed to offer a sacrifice and be forgiven... and in fact received an even harsher sentence than 'mere' exile.

Either way it still seems an atrocity to kill someone for this. Especially via the especially cruel method of stoning. Is that the only way the Ancients knew for applying the death penalty?

Meanwhile modern civilized countries often put people in jail for igniting and inhaling a plant - odds are plenty of ancient folk would consider that quite barbaric And we often have no penalty (and indeed quite lucrative financial gains to be made) for actively inciting people to violate their marriage vows via cheating/affair websites. Obviously different folk have different ideas on how to run a society even when we've all grown up in a similar timeframe and cultural milieu; it hardly seems reasonable to expect that folk from three thousand years ago should conform to the same ideals as you or I. But the point which I have repeatedly raised - and has scarcely if at all been answered - is the question of whether this story/example makes sense as part of the overall, highly successful Torah system? As one of if not the main way of building up both social cohesion and personal holiness/morality in Israelite society, was the Sabbath important enough to warrant such an extreme example being made of this fellow who showed contempt for it?

Obviously none of us can know whether Torah-based society would have been so astonishingly successful in a counterfactual world with less "atrocity." But I would suggest that it's probable the authors for their part had reasonable justification for thinking that level of harshness was warranted or even necessary in the case of dishonouring such an important part of the societal model.

[Miles]

Although I wouldn't characterize gathering sticks on the sabbath as an act of evil, something "profoundly immoral and wicked, " I will go along with Elijah John's intent here.

So, in as much as evil is created by god (he tells us as much in Isaiah) I guess he should be the one to decide if an act fits his concept of evil, whatever it may be. And because. ". . . the Lord said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp." it's obvious that as sinful as killing a person may be; "Thou shall not kill," god makes an exception in this case because gathering sticks upon the sabbath day (working) is far worse than killing a human. So in the hierarchy of sins, working on the Sabbath outranks stoning another human to death.

Crazy for sure, but then that's god for you.


.

[brunumb]

[Replying to Miles in post #139]

I wonder, does the punishment end at the stoning? When the offender fronts God and faces judgment, does he then get sent to hell for eternity for his sin? Talk about double jeopardy.