ok, so you admit that adultery still exists and that it's still a big thing
and you appear to reveal that your primary issue is with the method of punishment
ok - how should adultery be punished?
That's between the parties concerned.
ok, so you admit that adultery still exists and that it's still a big thing
and you appear to reveal that your primary issue is with the method of punishment
ok - how should adultery be punished?
Her accusers and "nope" in turn.
Who was left at the end of that passage besides Jesus and the woman?
| 8 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. 2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. 3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, 4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. 5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. 7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. 8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. 9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. 10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? 11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. 12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. |
well, let's take a look:
8 Jesus went unto the mount of Olives.
2 And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them.
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,
4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.
12 Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.
there are two groups identified "all the people" which appears to include pharisees not involved with the taking of the woman and "the scribes and pharisees" who brought the woman
it was "the scribes and pharisees" to who He spoke the words "He that is without sin among you"
it was the scribes and pharisees who were "they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last"
not the crowd of "all the people"
they're still there, hanging back - they are the "them" of John 8:12 "Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."
That's between the parties concerned.
Ah, fair enough, it was just her accusers.
when a married woman commits adultery, the parties concerned include her, her husband, her children, her family and friends, her employer, her children's school - teachers, friends, other parents, and on and on
now double that by including everybody on the other side
you believe that society shouldn't play a role in controlling adultery
i believe that society has a vested interest in controlling adultery, that absent control of adultery, society pays an incredibly heavy price for not controlling adultery
ok, so the context is that when Jesus spoke the words "He that is without sin among you", He was addressing the scribes and pharisees, who would not have recognized the concept of original sin and who would have rejected the accusation of any single sin except the one they were committing by violating Leviticus 20:10
No, it's called historical revisionism.
The Lord Jesus Christ.
Before the RCC tried to pretend that it created it.In what year was the canon of Scripture determined?
:nuke: means permaban
[MENTION=12969]Sherman[/MENTION]
Laurance Vance said:The fact that throughout human history rulers and government bureaucrats have been nanny statists and puritanical busybodies that wanted to unite law and their concept of morality is a historical fact, but it is certainly not the way things ought to be – not if we are to have a free society.
Laws that criminalize activities that voluntarily take place behind closed doors are unenforceable. An unenforceable law is no law at all. Again, it is merely a suggestion.
when a married woman commits adultery, the parties concerned include her, her husband, her children, her family and friends, her employer, her children's school - teachers, friends, other parents, and on and on
now double that by including everybody on the other side
you believe that society shouldn't play a role in controlling adultery
i believe that society has a vested interest in controlling adultery, that absent control of adultery, society pays an incredibly heavy price for not controlling adultery
You think there's no victim in a case of adultery? :shocked:Hmmm, Every crime needs a victim, not a potential victim, a possible victim, or a supposed victim, but an actual victim who suffers actual harm or loss. This means that over 90 percent of all federal and state laws are bogus.
Before the RCC tried to pretend that it created it.
You think there's no victim in a case of adultery? :shocked:
Laurance Vance said:Let me be perfectly clear: I think adultery is always wrong. I believe it is immoral. I consider it to be a grave sin. But it is neither my business nor the business of government to keep people from bad habits, vice, or immoral activities that take place between consenting adults.
You think there's no victim in a case of adultery? :shocked:
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Let me be perfectly clear: I think adultery is always wrong. I believe it is immoral. I consider it to be a grave sin. But it is neither my business nor the business of government to keep people from bad habits, vice, or immoral activities that take place between consenting adults.
Was gonna ask you about something, but I need to ask you this first:
Do you think that marriages fall under the responsibility of the government?