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]

[Replying to post 18 by StuartJ]

I didn't make any claims...

Let's examine your post and see if this is true:

JW (1) - to complete" is not a synonym of "to correct".

JW (2) -To complete is to continue somethjng in its established trajectory to its natural ending, not to change that course as erroneous.

JW (3) - Jesus said he did not come to change the law,

JW (4) - the LAW (refering to the original written law of Moses) contained nothing that needed correcting (compare Psalms 19:7).

JW (5) - The Pharasaic oral "traditions" were never part of the written law of Moses

JW (6) - Jesus rightly ignored most of them, but the 613 written laws of the Torah,

JW (7) - he "completed" "fulfilled" since they were part of God's faultless, perfect inspired word.

That is 7 claims made by you.

Let's see, is it true that you didn't make any claims?

No it isn't. You made 7 claims.

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 18 by StuartJ]

I didn't make any claims, I stated my beliefs. Please see the note at the end of my post (before the links).

JW

And now you are claiming (by inference again) that if you state your beliefs ...

You don't need to trouble yourself with the unfortunate need to try and back them up with non-existent evidence ...

Because beliefs aren't claims ...

And it's claims that need to be backed by evidence.

And so the catch-me-if-you-can game of make-believe goes round and round.

Please follow the Atheist example and try really, really hard to stay focused and give direct, honest answers to the topic.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 18 by StuartJ]

I didn't make any claims...

Let's examine your post and see if this is true:

JW (1) - to complete" is not a synonym of "to correct".

JW (2) -To complete is to continue somethjng in its established trajectory to its natural ending, not to change that course as erroneous.

JW (3) - Jesus said he did not come to change the law,

JW (4) - the LAW (refering to the original written law of Moses) contained nothing that needed correcting (compare Psalms 19:7).

JW (5) - The Pharasaic oral "traditions" were never part of the written law of Moses

JW (6) - Jesus rightly ignored most of them, but the 613 written laws of the Torah,

JW (7) - he "completed" "fulfilled" since they were part of God's faultless, perfect inspired word.

That is 7 claims made by you.

Let's see, is it true that you didn't make any claims?

No it isn't. You made 7 claims.

you seem to have missed ....

The above represent my beliefs as one of Jehovah's Witnesses

They were not claims they were all faith based belief statements.



JW

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

There is a requirement in this forum for EVIDENCE

Cluttering up a topic with faith-based belief statements is not debating.

Once again I ask you to address the debate topic directly, concisely ...

... and honestly.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 23 by JehovahsWitness]

There is a requirement in this forum for EVIDENCE

* EVIDENCE

The available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

Information is a type of evidence* and my post contains information , namely my beliefs and opinions on the topic at hand. I was not under the impression there is a prohibition on beliefs and opinion in this forum. My understanding is as long as one does not put forth one's beliefs / opinions as fact (which I did not do, since my post has a specific statement of FAITH /belief in it) then I stand in no violation.





Personal Blog: Evidence v proof
https://fosterheologicalreflections.blo ... ience.html










RELATED POSTS

What is evidence?
viewtopic.php?p=942218#p942218

What is verifiable evidence?
viewtopic.php?p=956688#p956688

How does proof differ from evidence?
viewtopic.php?p=950455#p950455

Is there empiracle evidence of the gospel miracles?
viewtopic.php?p=974565#p974565
url=viewtopic.php?p=979967#p979967

Do Extraordinary Claims Require Extraordinary Evidence?
viewtopic.php?p=330870#p330870

For further reading please go to other posts related to...

LOGIC , EVIDENCE and ... FAITH

[JehovahsWitness]

I ask you to address the debate topic directly, concisely ...

... and honestly.

My understanding was the debate was about the relevance of the Mosaic Law to Christians. In this regard the passage of Matthew 5:17 was raised. My post was in response to an entry on this specific scripture.

I try to be as concise as possible but feel free to ignore anything I write if you find it insufficiently so.


JW

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 25 by JehovahsWitness]

Address the topic directly and concisely and honestly ...

Otherwise, you continue to publically make my points for me.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 18 by StuartJ]

I didn't make any claims...

Let's examine your post and see if this is true:

JW (1) - to complete" is not a synonym of "to correct".

JW (2) -To complete is to continue somethjng in its established trajectory to its natural ending, not to change that course as erroneous.

JW (3) - Jesus said he did not come to change the law,

JW (4) - the LAW (refering to the original written law of Moses) contained nothing that needed correcting (compare Psalms 19:7).

JW (5) - The Pharasaic oral "traditions" were never part of the written law of Moses

JW (6) - Jesus rightly ignored most of them, but the 613 written laws of the Torah,

JW (7) - he "completed" "fulfilled" since they were part of God's faultless, perfect inspired word.

That is 7 claims made by you.

Let's see, is it true that you didn't make any claims?

No it isn't. You made 7 claims.

They were not claims they were all faith based belief statements.

You can redefine them with whatever words you choose. They remain unsupported by you no matter which words you use to attempt to dodge this fact.

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

Word games are most unconvincing.

[JehovahsWitness]

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

Then feel free to ignore them and move right along.

Have a most excellent evening,


JW

[1213]

...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.