Incorrectly stoning the virgins

[Desert Snake]

There were different groups in Israel at the time with different beliefs, this is why Jesus's teachings are different from many others around him, he was preaching Nazarene/Essene values for instance, and it must have rubbed certain Jews the wrong way, who were practicing these primitive teachings, Jesus was obviously teaching against these primitive beliefs, that is why so much of his teachings were for instance 'circumcision isn't necessary', dieatary laws are not important(they aren't metaphysical), etc. etc. He was obviously essentially trying to teach a primitive and magic/ceremony, violent peoples who were residing in Yisrael the error of their ways, but they refused to listen, it would eventually take Gentile thought combined with the logic of Saul-Paul to bring a sense of normalcy to the region, now many/most Jews are indistinguishable from their Gentile counterparts who many of them once hated.
Saul-Paul for all intents and purposes was the father of modern Jewry.

 

[Horrorble]

I belive the answer from some would be as follows. God is perfect, and his law is perfect. Had the woman been a virgin, and the man to tiny to pop the cherry, then god would have sent an angel to do it, and she would have bled.

There was no mistake. That is impossible. The woman's brutal stoning was in accordance with the absolute morals of god. Your mistake is in trying to apply objectivity and decide for yourself what is right and wrong. That seems rather arrogant to me

I'm sorry but what!? Do you actually think a Jewish person would give an answer like this?

 

[fantome profane]

There were different groups in Israel at the time with different beliefs, this is why Jesus's teachings are different from many others around him, he was preaching Nazarene/Essene values for instance, and it must have rubbed certain Jews the wrong way, who were practicing these primitive teachings, Jesus was obviously teaching against these primitive beliefs, that is why so much of his teachings were for instance 'circumcision isn't necessary', dieatary laws are not important(they aren't metaphysical), etc. etc. He was obviously essentially trying to teach a primitive and magic/ceremony, violent peoples who were residing in Yisrael the error of their ways, but they refused to listen, it would eventually take Gentile thought combined with the logic of Saul-Paul to bring a sense of normalcy to the region, now many/most Jews are indistinguishable from their Gentile counterparts who many of them once hated.
Saul-Paul for all intents and purposes was the father of modern Jewry.

Excuse me, I realize this is rather off-topic, but where did you get the idea that Jesus said circumcision isn't necessary?

 

[Me Myself]

I'm sorry but what!? Do you actually think a Jewish person would give an answer like this?

I knnow right? Being jew automotically makes you invulnerable to the silliness of othuer religious people

While I wouldnt say all jews say this, I would be very surprise none has ever said this. We barely have jew answers here, so maybe they are ashame of whatever they beiee regarding this issue

 

[Me Myself]

What strikes me is the weird title.
It suggests a possibility of correctly stoning the virgins.

Weed?

 

[atanu]

Weed?

You should be stoned.

 

[Horrorble]

I knnow right? Being jew automotically makes you invulnerable to the silliness of othuer religious people

While I wouldnt say all jews say this, I would be very surprise none has ever said this. We barely have jew answers here, so maybe they are ashame of whatever they beiee regarding this issue

Well I know I haven't been in this forum for that long but I haven't ever seen a regular Jewish or Christian member answer a scriptural question with "cause god said so"

Maybe they just don't want to talk to you

 

[Desert Snake]

Maybe they just don't want to talk to you

I often get answers from the Jewish members on RF, some credible, others, not so much.

:namaste

 

[Horrorble]

I often get answers from the Jewish members on RF, some credible, others, not so much.

:namaste

I guess they want to talk to you
:namaste

 

[Desert Snake]

I guess they want to talk to you
:namaste

Could be that I ask serious questions.

 

[Me Myself]

Could be that I ask serious questions.

The question is a good one, f you think it's not, then what would be your "jewish" answer?

 

[Me Myself]

Ah adorable :areyoucra

 

[Desert Snake]

actually I wasn't inferring anything about your question.

 

[dantech]

This is precisely why the written Torah cannot be read without the oral Torah.
It is written that a Sanhedrin (group of judges) that has killed one person in 70 years is considered an evil one.
There are thousands of little loopholes in the oral Torah that serve a purpose specifically to avoid killing people.

 

[Me Myself]

This is precisely why the written Torah cannot be read without the oral Torah.
It is written that a Sanhedrin (group of judges) that has killed one person in 70 years is considered an evil one.
There are thousands of little loopholes in the oral Torah that serve a purpose specifically to avoid killing people.

May you elaborate? (With the specific examle of this pasage?)

 

[dantech]

May you elaborate? (With the specific examle of this pasage?)

This page explains it better than I'd be able to, so here's a link.
Capital Punishment

 

[atanu]

Yes. In eastern scripture, namely, Satapatha Brahmana, there is a story about how the yajnas (sacrifices) remain incomplete because mostly the sacrificer has a partial view of the scripture (the Word). It is, IMO, about first internalising the Word as indivisible one.

 

[Me Myself]

This page explains it better than I'd be able to, so here's a link.
Capital Punishment

One problem there is that while if true then MAYBE no inocent woman was stoned because of it, there was still the incorrect belief that without bleeding there is no virginity and the woman would have been held guilty.

The link doesnt say no one is ever held guilty just that death is unfrecuente (even extemely so) wwhen dealing with the guilty people.

 

[dantech]

One problem there is that while if true then MAYBE no inocent woman was stoned because of it, there was still the incorrect belief that without bleeding there is no virginity and the woman would have been held guilty.

The link doesnt say no one is ever held guilty just that death is unfrecuente (even extemely so) wwhen dealing with the guilty people.

Actually, the oral Torah steps in again.
This is just too show you how difficult and rare(probably never) that people would get the death penalty.
The oral Torah says that when the husband sees the lack of blood, he may suspect that she isn't a virgin, and in that case, will need two witnesses who have seen her sin(pretty much impossible).

The Talmud clearly talks about how the blood stain means nothing because it can so easily be falsified.

I don't have my books with me right now so I'll try posting sources later.