Let he who is without sin ...

ThazzarBaal

ThazzarBaal

Registered Senior Member
As the crowd brought the woman accused of adultery in front of Jesus just after apprehending her at the brothel she worked in, they picked up stones to fulfill the law.

Or to protect themselves from being ousted for being in the brothel in the first place?
 
ThazzarBaal said:
As the crowd brought the woman accused of adultery in front of Jesus just after apprehending her at the brothel she worked in, they picked up stones to fulfill the law.

Or to protect themselves from being ousted for being in the brothel in the first place?
Click to expand...
There’s nothing about a brothel in this story from St. John’s gospel. She was just a woman “taken in adultery”, i.e. having extramarital sex.
 
exchemist said:
There’s nothing about a brothel in this story from St. John’s gospel. She was just a woman “taken in adultery”, i.e. having extramarital sex.
Click to expand...

Yeah maybe ... Then again, maybe she was outing everyone in the crown with stones as past customers before Jesus made the let he who is without sin statement with Virgil in the background calling out Hank asking if Elizabeth knew about his attendance.

You may be right though. She was just a regular woman and the crowd with stones weren't guilty of the transgression they were accusing her of.
 
Guadalupe said Virgil called out Hank before he done it and Rosa said she was there too. Fernandez isn't speaking about it though.
 
Rosa said I can talk about it here because the name Jesus belongs to her religion or maybe it's a question to get you thinking more practically about the event.
 
exchemist said:
So the rest of the rest of the time you’re just a berk, then, I take it:D.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sometimes but ... Back to the point. You're suggesting she was just another woman who had a single transgression and a crowd of people decided they would stone her to death? Is that right? Surely others in the crowd never associated with the woman - they just decided they'd pick up some stones and throw them based on an accusation. No one in the crowd had anything to hide, no wives to go home to, nor positions that needed to be secured.

No other reason to stone an "adulterous" woman than someone making an accusation. Maybe I'm a fool for suggesting it, and maybe I'm a fool for suggesting a brothel, but people are freaking crazy if it played out they way you seem to be suggesting.
 
Beer w/Straw said:
Make America Great Again! :)
Click to expand...

Well, I'm a staunch supporter of our 1st amendment right, so I guess standing on that right would help make it great again. Beyond this, I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to, unless Trumps presidential slogan ... in which case I'll tell you I was likewise a staunch suppoerter of Obama's hope and change campaign.
 
ThazzarBaal said:
Yeah, sometimes but ... Back to the point. You're suggesting she was just another woman who had a single transgression and a crowd of people decided they would stone her to death? Is that right? Surely others in the crowd never associated with the woman - they just decided they'd pick up some stones and throw them based on an accusation. No one in the crowd had anything to hide, no wives to go home to, nor positions that needed to be secured.

No other reason to stone an "adulterous" woman than someone making an accusation. Maybe I'm a fool for suggesting it, and maybe I'm a fool for suggesting a brothel, but people are freaking crazy if it played out they way you seem to be suggesting.
Click to expand...
It's not the first time someone would have to be freaking crazy for taking the bible at face value.
 
gmilam said:
It's not the first time someone would have to be freaking crazy for taking the bible at face value.
Click to expand...

I've read it a few times over. I couldn't count the hours in discussion and debate, nor the written pages of discourse. The names I should leave out of the opponents I've faced, some for and others against, many of whom are very well known public figures from both sides of the fence. I would typically agree that a face value reading is crazy to attempt to uphold, but I'll continue standing on the the lengthy discourse, study, and debate of theological nature concerning its content.

Movie rights undetermined but we're looking at a more realistic rendition of the the events recorded.
 
ThazzarBaal said:
I've read it a few times over. I couldn't count the hours in discussion and debate, nor the written pages of discourse. The names I should leave out of the opponents I've faced, some for and others against, many of whom are very well known public figures from both sides of the fence. I would typically agree that a face value reading is crazy to attempt to uphold, but I'll continue standing on the the lengthy discourse, study, and debate of theological nature concerning its content.

Movie rights undetermined but we're looking at a more realistic rendition of the the events recorded.
Click to expand...
Then I recommend reading it again. The scribes and pharisees were trying to trap Jesus into breaking the law. No interpretation required.
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.
Click to expand...
 
gmilam said:
Then I recommend reading it again. The scribes and pharisees were trying to trap Jesus into breaking the law. No interpretation required.
Click to expand...

They were trying to trap him. That much is in the text. That much isn't in question. The event wasn't thoroughly illustrated in the text, but Jesus was viewed as an enemy and perhaps an antagonist against some of the authorities. The woman was accused of adultery. The law was to stone her. He didn't attempt to prevent them. Where does that leave it?
 
ThazzarBaal said:
Well, I'm a staunch supporter of our 1st amendment right, so I guess standing on that right would help make it great again. Beyond this, I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to, unless Trumps presidential slogan ... in which case I'll tell you I was likewise a staunch suppoerter of Obama's hope and change campaign.
Click to expand...
You probably understand my words better than I do. I just think public stoning should be legalized. Being able to punish the liberals and sinners so openly would make people closer to God. Can you imagine how many sinners could have been purged in the 2020 election fraud riots? :leaf:
 
Beer w/Straw said:
You probably understand my words better than I do. I just think public stoning should be legalized. Being able to punish the liberals and sinners so openly would make people closer to God. Can you imagine how many sinners could have been purged in the 2020 election fraud riots? :leaf:
Click to expand...

Our sins are always fading. I suppose that's part of the process. I'm a supporter of legalized Cannabis, so that type of public display may be understandable. Having bipolar and an onset of PTSD symptoms undiagnosed to date makes the medical applications more appealing than not. As for literal purging by throwing stones I'll pass on that display. I'll pass on the sadist type of domineering humiliation methods too, but I'm not opposed to calling a kettle black. 1st amendment standing of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top