Bible vs. Science

Let's also imagine that we are all at a cocktail party or lounge (well, not this early in the morning! ). What is this ALL CAPS and bold print crap? I think we can hear and comprehend without the shouting and screaming. How would one react to that in person?

Would you step outside, please?

Which law requires stoning?

Which law required Jesus to personally be the one to carry out the death sentence?

Frank Apisa wrote:

Arella Mae wrote:

I think you're just not going to be happy Frank until someone is out there somewhere stoning someone.

What part of this don't you get? He is God Frank. If He didn't stone her then He was right. Period! You don't accept that, that's fine but it doesn't change the fact He was right.

Why don't you think before you post.

The thing being dealt with was whether or not Jesus "kept the law."

IF JESUS HAD KEPT THE LAW...HE WOULD HAVE STONED HER.

If you went before a judge for a speeding / parking ticket and because you have been laid off work and struggling to support your family the judge (having compassion) decided to waive the ticket and set you free of the debt......would you then accuse the judge to his face of not keeping or even breaking the law?

Why.....of course not you silly rabbit.

By the way, there was no sense in your reply. He did not participate in the execution of the woman--he did not keep the law.

I suppose I should point out that the passage of John 7:53 - 8:11 is missing from early versions of the Gospel of John. (In some manuscripts it appears after Luke 21:38.) It may therefore be spurious.

Yet, it seems to indicate a personality trait we would expect in Jesus. Keep in mind that Jesus reputedly had the power to read the sins of everyone with whom he came in contact. (He knew the Samaritan woman was with a man not her husband.) In his position as God's representative, he rightly could have executed the lot of them.

But, Jesus had already proved himself worthy of carrying out his promised function as king and priest. He therefore asserted his right to forgive whomever he wished. He even invoked forgiveness for his executioners. (Matthew 23:34)

Setanta wrote:

By the way, there was no sense in your reply. He did not participate in the execution of the woman--he did not keep the law.

To Frank also:

However you define keeping the law. He broke no law nor was he obligated by any law for him to execute the woman correct?

The lawbreakers (sinners) were the men who dropped their stones walking away and the woman.........not Jesus.

Now pay attention.

In order for Jesus to keep the law as you define it........how many other people do you think Jesus needed to have stoned or executed?

. . . How horrible it must be for you people to have to torture logic and twist and turn . . .

neologist wrote:

I suppose I should point out that the passage of John 7:53 - 8:11 is missing from early versions of the Gospel of John. (In some manuscripts it appears after Luke 21:38.) It may therefore be spurious.

Yet, it seems to indicate a personality trait we would expect in Jesus. Keep in mind that Jesus reputedly had the power to read the sins of everyone with whom he came in contact. (He knew the Samaritan woman was with a man not her husband.) In his position as God's representative, he rightly could have executed the lot of them.

But, Jesus had already proved himself worthy of carrying out his promised function as king and priest. He therefore asserted his right to forgive whomever he wished. He even invoked forgiveness for his executioners. (Matthew 23:34)

Bottom line is....HE DID NOT KEEP THE LAW. HE CHANGED IT....DESPITE INSISTING HE WAS NOT HERE TO CHANGE IT.

Frank Apisa wrote:

neologist wrote:

I suppose I should point out that the passage of John 7:53 - 8:11 is missing from early versions of the Gospel of John. (In some manuscripts it appears after Luke 21:38.) It may therefore be spurious.

Yet, it seems to indicate a personality trait we would expect in Jesus. Keep in mind that Jesus reputedly had the power to read the sins of everyone with whom he came in contact. (He knew the Samaritan woman was with a man not her husband.) In his position as God's representative, he rightly could have executed the lot of them.

But, Jesus had already proved himself worthy of carrying out his promised function as king and priest. He therefore asserted his right to forgive whomever he wished. He even invoked forgiveness for his executioners. (Matthew 23:34)

Bottom line is....HE DID NOT KEEP THE LAW. HE CHANGED IT....DESPITE INSISTING HE WAS NOT HERE TO CHANGE IT.

In order for Jesus to keep the law as you define it........how many other people do you think Jesus needed/needs to have stoned or executed?

John 8:1  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.



Was it proven that the woman broke the law? Why would the scribes and Pharisees walk away if they were not convinced of her guilt? In the end, nobody condemned her. No law was broken according to the accusers.

Intrepid wrote:

John 8:1  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.



Was it proven that the woman broke the law? Why would the scribes and Pharisees walk away if they were not convinced of her guilt? In the end, nobody condemned her. No law was broken according to the accusers.

Nice try.

But read the passage over again.

There seems to be no doubt that the woman was caught in the act of adultery.

The passage cannot be explained, Intrepid...and only people unwilling to see the silliness of the Bible will try.

JESUS DID NOT "KEEP THE LAW" IN THIS INSTANCE.

Another interesting point is that she was "taken in adultery, in the very act" of adultery. So, how did they accomplish that? Were they laying for her--was this a set-up?

I do love the misogynistic hypocricy, too--where was the man who would also have been caught in the act? Oh yeah, not a sin for him . . .

Frank Apisa wrote:

Intrepid wrote:

John 8:1  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.



Was it proven that the woman broke the law? Why would the scribes and Pharisees walk away if they were not convinced of her guilt? In the end, nobody condemned her. No law was broken according to the accusers.

Nice try.

But read the passage over again.

There seems to be no doubt that the woman was caught in the act of adultery.

The passage cannot be explained, Intrepid...and only people unwilling to see the silliness of the Bible will try.

JESUS DID NOT "KEEP THE LAW" IN THIS INSTANCE.

Nice try, Frank. First we must look at the agenda of the Pharasees. It was to trap Jesus. It is not proven that the woman committed the crime, it is only alleged to see if they could trap Jesus.

Neither of us can absolutely prove their contention.