Would you stone the man described in Numbers 15?

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Re: Would you stone the man described in Numbers 15?

Post by Jagella »

PinSeeker wrote: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.
What have you done to judge yourself that way?

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Re: Would you stone the man described in Numbers 15?

Post by Jagella »

PinSeeker wrote:
rikuoamero wrote:If violence and murder is a bad thing in your eyes (and mine), why is your god commanding it?
He's not commanding violence and murder -- God does not "command" sin, nor is He the author of it, and murder is against His own Law (His sixth commandment), by the way, as you must well know -- but rather executing His perfect justice. The man violated the fourth commandment. And in so doing, he exhibited -- even in what we might consider a benign way -- hatred for God and His Law. Anything less -- anything -- than perfect observance of all of God's Law and thus perfect love for Him is, in a godly sense, hatred of His Law and hatred of Him. Which is a violation of what Jesus said was the first and greatest commandment -- to love the Lord God with all the heart, mind, and strength. And we are all guilty of this. All of us. It takes different forms in all of us, but we're all guilty. Every single last one of us.
That's an amazing sermon! I'm sure Christians and Jews everywhere will breathe a sigh of relief now believing that their god having a man murdered is justified after all.

But it isn't justified as far as I (and Rik) are concerned. You can say what you wish, but I say that the man in Numbers 15 was cruelly murdered. Anybody who advocates such an act is advocating murder--god or no god--law or no law.

Finally, if the man victimized in Numbers 15 hated the Bible god and that god's stupid law, then he was totally justified in doing so. Such a wicked god deserves to be hated and his barbaric laws defied. If Yahweh wants to be loved and his laws obeyed, then ordering that a man be stoned to death for gathering sticks won't help.

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Post by Jagella »

Mithrae wrote:You're attempting to portray stoning as some kind of "sadistic" execution. It could potentially be a slow and painful death... but only if you're determined to start with the assumption that the Israelites were sadists. Otherwise it could easily have been more humane than hanging (to say nothing of crucifixion, burning etc.), even comparable to shooting or beheading.
We could try it on you, and then you can tell us all that's it's not so bad. :roll:

User avatar
Tcg
Prodigy
Posts: 4171
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone

Post by Tcg »

Jagella wrote:
Mithrae wrote:You're attempting to portray stoning as some kind of "sadistic" execution. It could potentially be a slow and painful death... but only if you're determined to start with the assumption that the Israelites were sadists. Otherwise it could easily have been more humane than hanging (to say nothing of crucifixion, burning etc.), even comparable to shooting or beheading.
We could try it on you, and then you can tell us all that's it's not so bad. :roll:

Once a poster decides to argue that stoning is better than hanging, crucifixion, burning, shooting, or beheading, they've clearly entered into justifying senseless violence.


There is no good form of senseless violence. We are discussing punishment for collecting firewood. Violent death is being justified over firewood. It's like arguing over the best way to murder someone for jaywalking.





Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

User avatar
Mithrae
Site Admin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:33 am
Location: Australia

Post by Mithrae »

Jagella wrote:
Mithrae wrote:You're attempting to portray stoning as some kind of "sadistic" execution. It could potentially be a slow and painful death... but only if you're determined to start with the assumption that the Israelites were sadists. Otherwise it could easily have been more humane than hanging (to say nothing of crucifixion, burning etc.), even comparable to shooting or beheading.
We could try it on you, and then you can tell us all that's it's not so bad. :roll:
There's a reason I haven't answered any of your posts. Thankyou for illustrating why :) Ditto for Tcg. I'm sure it seems very simple and straightforward to you guys; it feels wrong, therefore it's 'barbaric' or 'senseless' or whatever, and any kind of anthropological context is entirely irrelevant to you.


Edit: Ironically, just yesterday I happened to notice a post about abortion by a pastor friend on Facebook. The parallels are quite striking. To them it feels wrong to be slicing up innocent babies in the womb, and that's all there is to it; anything else just feeble rationalization of 'monstrous' behaviour.

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Post by Jagella »

Mithrae wrote:There's a reason I haven't answered any of your posts.
Evidently that reason doesn't apply to this post.
Thankyou for illustrating why :)
I "illustrated" that your argument is invalid. If you argue that stoning is relatively humane, then you should accept it for yourself and not just inflict it on other victims. If stoning is humane for them, then it's humane for you and your family and your friends.
Ditto for Tcg.


Did Tcg also demonstrate that your argument is not valid?
I'm sure it seems very simple and straightforward to you guys; it feels wrong, therefore it's 'barbaric' or 'senseless' or whatever, and any kind of anthropological context is entirely irrelevant to you.
Yes, I feel that bashing a man's head in with rocks is barbaric and senseless regardless of the "anthropological context." Altering the time, place, or culture of such a heinous act does not make it any less terrifying, painful, or deadly.

Now, if a crazed mob of religious zealots was surrounding you ready to stone you to death, and there was a person there who could call off the stoning, would you rather have that person be someone like you who defends stoning as justified based on that "anthropological context," or would you rather that person be someone who feels like I do about stoning?

Finally, here's a photo of a stoning victim:

Moderator Action

Graphic image removed. Can we please don't do that?


Do you wish to argue that what we see here is acceptable?
Last edited by Jagella on Sat Mar 02, 2019 9:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Post by Jagella »

Tcg wrote:Once a poster decides to argue that stoning is better than hanging, crucifixion, burning, shooting, or beheading, they've clearly entered into justifying senseless violence.
Yes, and like I've pointed out, stoning appears to be only justifiable if it's inflicted on "the other guy." Those here making a case that the stoning is morally justified are then inconsistent.
There is no good form of senseless violence. We are discussing punishment for collecting firewood. Violent death is being justified over firewood. It's like arguing over the best way to murder someone for jaywalking.
As I've pointed out, the stoning in Numbers 15 is not only cruel, it is totally stupid to kill a man because he was gathering sticks.

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Re: Would you stone the man described in Numbers 15?

Post by Jagella »

JJ50 wrote:There is a lot of things in the Bible which are very wrong indeed, and no decent person should take them seriously.
You have it right there in one sentence. Did you notice the mounds of text being posted by those who try to justify the stoning? Rationalization is a lengthy process!

User avatar
Mithrae
Site Admin
Posts: 3857
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:33 am
Location: Australia

Post by Mithrae »

Jagella wrote:
Mithrae wrote:There's a reason I haven't answered any of your posts.
Evidently that reason doesn't apply to this post.
Thankyou for illustrating why :)
I "illustrated" that your argument is invalid. If you argue that stoning is relatively humane, then you should accept it for yourself and not just inflict it on other victims. If stoning is humane for them, then it's humane for you and your family and your friends.
You seem to struggle with the concept of time; you don't seem to understand that we're talking about judicial codes from ~3000 years ago. Your emotional responses are on about the same level as calling chariots and water wheels 'idiotic' devices and purely because millennia of ongoing progress have given us something better, and trying to mock someone with a more objective assessment by saying that if chariots were good enough for the Hittites they should be good enough for me. You can see how... special... that kind of [strike]thinking[/strike] feeling is, can't you?

User avatar
Jagella
Banned
Banned
Posts: 3667
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2006 12:01 am
Contact:

Post by Jagella »

Mithrae wrote:You seem to struggle with the concept of time...
And you seem to struggle with addressing the issues I raised and answering my questions. Answer my questions, and I will answer yours.

Post Reply