The woman taken in adultery

NonStampCollector

The woman taken in adultery

10/10/2014

7 Comments

image: creative commons license 0, public domain. Pixabay user: cello5

7 Comments

wheels5894

10/13/2014 12:49:46 am

Interesting thought, though Jesus doesn't precisely rule out stoning - only for the first person to be sin free which just raises the bar from starting the punishment.

Harry

10/13/2014 11:12:29 am

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone at her."
A stone comes flying and hits the women.
Jesus looks up and shouts, "MOM!"
- Bart Ehrman

Rastaca

1/9/2015 02:05:54 am

Shouldn't Jesus have flung the first stone himself? Or, is he admitting he had sinned, and was therefore and imperfect god himself?

Deb

12/9/2014 05:32:24 pm

hi no stamp - I saw your videos for the first time a few days ago, and I just love it! Unfortunately, I cannot post more than 2 or 3 on my FaceBook timeline hoping to get my religious family & friends to see things from a fresh perspective. These are great for helping the afflicted to reason in ways not thought of before. There are some that need to be polished up, though. The language isn't too bad, but the yelling during 😀

Dan

7/3/2016 02:01:10 am

You seem happy to play loose with the truth as long as it insults God. First, who said Jesus claimed to have a better way than the Father? Where is that in scripture? Or is it just a conclusion you draw so you'll have a straw man to attack?

Second, it's hard to commit adultery alone. Where's the man or men she committed adultery with? Was it the men who planned to stone her? Perhaps she would have just as much right to stone them if not more so.

Third, where in the Bible does it say that those who would be stoning were a mob of thugs? Fourth, where does it state that this law of stoning adulterers is for all people Jew and Non-Jew in all places for all time?

Fourth, considering that adultery is a choice, a choice to go against one's most sacred and holy of vows, and given that was known ahead of time what the penalty for adultery was, who are you to criticize Jesus because people decided to make their wedding vows a little more sincere and a little more reasonable and honest by signing off on their wedding vows with a promise not to rip apart the family with adultery, not to bring back sexually transmitted diseases into the family, not to deprive the family of their right to live together in love enjoying the shared family assets and future income?

Maybe the prohibition against adultery was nothing but an act of integrity, courage, and sincerity. And perhaps where stoning becomes reprehensible is where it is applied unfairly only to women or where it performed hypocritically for other more selfish reasons than to uphold the honor of marriage.

Other than that, looking at how inept people of the world have become at honoring wedding vows, perhaps it would be an excellent idea if our nation and its people actually had the integrity, the courage, the decency, and sincerity to implement such a rule here. Not for religious reasons, but to allow people the right to know whether the person they are marrying really intend to keep the vows or whether they intend to use marriage to rob them blind and violate their families.

NSC

7/4/2016 03:12:58 pm

I'm more than happy to have this comment here on this thread. Discovering that there are still people around who think this way is kind of novel. A bit like discovering a living Neanderthal.

Rom

7/4/2016 09:40:03 pm

You just defending stoning people to death. Thanks for showing us all that enlightened Christian morality, we're very impressed.

NonStampCollector

Youtube antitheistic video maker. See "info" section above for more of who I am.
This blog is a place for me to write or present things that are too long for twitter, and not of a 'video' nature.
Follow me on twitter (above) or sub to the RSS feed (below) to be notified of when I've put something up.
Thanks for taking a look, feedback welcome.
NSC.