Muslims and Chrs./Jews swapped role in stoning to death.

[MNoBody]

IMO stoning anyone to death for any religious reasons or otherwise would be a reversion back to barbarism.

 

[The_Fisher_King]

Indeed. And that's one of the greatest blunders in the history. Taking Hadiths seriously is completely absurd. Hadiths were written generations after the death of Muhammad, after the end of the era of the Rashidun Caliphate, over 1,000 km (620 mi) from where Muhammad lived.

Hadiths are basically bunch of unconfirmed hearsays! How the hell can one confirm if what's being attributed to Prophet Muhammad is actually true or just outright lie/falsehood?

Then, on top of that being just hearsays, these Hadiths are passed around for GENERATIONS! And if the childhood game of telephone has taught us something, it is that message gets distorted as it gets passed on. True meaning of the original message is completely lost as it gets passed around.

I don't know how can any rational person can take Hadiths seriously

The 'science of Hadith', involving careful examination of the chain of transmission (the trustworthiness of each of the links in the chain of transmitters) associated with each Hadith, is a thing.

And Imam Malik, the compiler of the Muwatta, the earliest Hadith collection, lived in Madinah, hardly 1,000km away from where the Holy Prophet (pbuh) had lived.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

IMO stoning anyone to death for any religious reasons or otherwise would be a reversion back to barbarism.

It's one of the most horrible ways to die. I've seen videos of people being stoned to death and the cruelty is astonishing, and it's a very slow, torturous death (unless you end up "lucky" and you get hit in the head early enough on that you're knocked out). I really hope that the Jews don't get their messiah because those punishments need to be left in the dustbin of history. I can't imagine that the Supreme Being would order such a thing in the first place.

 

[Rival]

It's one of the most horrible ways to die. I've seen videos of people being stoned to death and the cruelty is astonishing, and it's a very slow, torturous death (unless you end up "lucky" and you get hit in the head early enough on that you're knocked out). I really hope that the Jews don't get their messiah because those punishments need to be left in the dustbin of history.

But...

"It was almost impossible to inflict the death penalty because the standards of proof were so high. As a result, convictions for capital offense were rare in Judaism.[15][16] The standards of evidence in capital cases include:

• It requires two witnesses who observed the crime. The accused would have been given a chance, and if s/he repeated the same crime, or any other, it would lead to a death sentence. If witnesses had been caught lying about the crime, they would be executed.
• Two witnesses were required. Acceptability was limited to:
  • Adult Jewish men who were known to keep the commandments, knew the written and oral law, and had legitimate professions;
  • The witnesses had to see each other at the time of the sin;
  • The witnesses had to be able to speak clearly, without any speech impediment or hearing deficit (to ensure that the warning and the response were done);
  • The witnesses could not be related to each other, or to the accused.
• The witnesses had to see each other, and both of them had to give a warning (hatra'ah) to the person that the sin they were about to commit was a capital offense;
• This warning had to be delivered within seconds of the performance of the sin (in the time it took to say, "Peace unto you, my Rabbi and my Master");
• In the same amount of time, the person about to sin had to both respond that s/he was familiar with the punishment, but they were going to sin anyway; and begin to commit the sin/crime;
• The Beth Din had to examine each witness separately; and if even one point of their evidence was contradictory - even if a very minor point, such as eye color - the evidence was considered contradictory, and the evidence was not heeded;
• The Beth Din had to consist of minimally 23 judges;
• The majority could not be a simple majority - the split verdict that would allow conviction had to be at least 13 to 11 in favour of conviction;
• If the Beth Din arrived at a unanimous verdict of guilty, the person was let go - the idea being that if no judge could find anything exculpatory about the accused, there was something wrong with the court.[17]
• The witnesses were appointed by the court to be the executioners."

Also stoning in Judaism isn't, iirc, the throwing of stones at a person.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

But...

"It was almost impossible to inflict the death penalty because the standards of proof were so high. As a result, convictions for capital offense were rare in Judaism.[15][16] The standards of evidence in capital cases include:

• It requires two witnesses who observed the crime. The accused would have been given a chance, and if s/he repeated the same crime, or any other, it would lead to a death sentence. If witnesses had been caught lying about the crime, they would be executed.
• Two witnesses were required. Acceptability was limited to:
  • Adult Jewish men who were known to keep the commandments, knew the written and oral law, and had legitimate professions;
  • The witnesses had to see each other at the time of the sin;
  • The witnesses had to be able to speak clearly, without any speech impediment or hearing deficit (to ensure that the warning and the response were done);
  • The witnesses could not be related to each other, or to the accused.
• The witnesses had to see each other, and both of them had to give a warning (hatra'ah) to the person that the sin they were about to commit was a capital offense;
• This warning had to be delivered within seconds of the performance of the sin (in the time it took to say, "Peace unto you, my Rabbi and my Master");
• In the same amount of time, the person about to sin had to both respond that s/he was familiar with the punishment, but they were going to sin anyway; and begin to commit the sin/crime;
• The Beth Din had to examine each witness separately; and if even one point of their evidence was contradictory - even if a very minor point, such as eye color - the evidence was considered contradictory, and the evidence was not heeded;
• The Beth Din had to consist of minimally 23 judges;
• The majority could not be a simple majority - the split verdict that would allow conviction had to be at least 13 to 11 in favour of conviction;
• If the Beth Din arrived at a unanimous verdict of guilty, the person was let go - the idea being that if no judge could find anything exculpatory about the accused, there was something wrong with the court.[17]
• The witnesses were appointed by the court to be the executioners."

Also stoning in Judaism isn't, iirc, the throwing of stones at a person.

I realize that the requirements are very high, but surely it was carried out at least a few times? Although, I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would continue to commit a crime after being caught and knowing the punishment.

How is it done? Do they just roll a boulder on you or something?

 

[Rival]

I realize that the requirements are very high, but surely it was carried out at least a few times? Although, I'm not sure anyone in their right mind would continue to commit a crime after being caught and knowing the punishment.

The popular saying is,

A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says that this extends to a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death even once in seventy years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: Had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death. Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel says: they would have multiplied shedders of blood in Israel.

How is it done? Do they just roll a boulder on you or something?

I honestly can't recall. I think they push you off a high place and then use the boulder.

 

[dybmh]

I honestly can't recall. I think they push you off a high place and then use the boulder.

"Although literally translated as "stoning," it actually consisted of being thrown from a high platform. Only if the person did not die from the fall were actual stones used."

From the footnotes on: Execution by Stoning - Positive Commandment 229

 

[Shad]

I don't get how ? Qur'an does not mention stoning to death as any capital punishment for any offense , while Bible implied it for a dozen of times . Sectarian Muslims endorse it in case of adultery/fornication while Christians/Jews do not do that . Muslims follow Bible and Christians/Jews follow Qur'an . What a flip-flop !

Sloppy logic. If one is not following X that does not mean they follow Y.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

The popular saying is,

A Sanhedrin that puts a man to death once in seven years is called destructive. Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah says that this extends to a Sanhedrin that puts a man to death even once in seventy years. Rabbi Akiba and Rabbi Tarfon say: Had we been in the Sanhedrin none would ever have been put to death. Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel says: they would have multiplied shedders of blood in Israel.


I honestly can't recall. I think they push you off a high place and then use the boulder.

Thanks for the info. Okay, maybe the Jewish messiah can come now.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

I take it that it's okay if we direct the ensuing world-wide Islamic wrath post-destroying-the-Al-Aqsa-Mosque at you?

The truth is, dumb political decisions were made by the Israeli government and the then Minister of Defense Moshe Dayan immediately after the Six-Day War, and that's why Jews can't build the Temple at the moment.

Yes, that was an extremely disappointing move on the part of Dayan. And not only can the Jews, you Jews, not build their temple, but they can't even pray on the temple mount.

As a Christian, I have often thought on this. Why would God allow that mosque to be built on that most Holy Place of His choosing? The Jews want to rebuild the Temple. If that mosque was not there, they would rebuild it.

I know the Temple will be rebuilt. The mosque is going to go somehow. The wild wrath of the Arab is going to decline. Perhaps it is declining already. Oil is free. Oil is what gave the Arab leverage in the world. Without oil as leverage, the Arab is just a camel rider.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yes, that was an extremely disappointing move on the part of Dayan. And not only can the Jews, you Jews, not build their temple, but they can't even pray on the temple mount.

As a Christian, I have often thought on this. Why would God allow that mosque to be built on that most Holy Place of His choosing? The Jews want to rebuild the Temple. If that mosque was not there, they would rebuild it.

I know the Temple will be rebuilt. The mosque is going to go somehow. The wild wrath of the Arab is going to decline. Perhaps it is declining already. Oil is free. Oil is what gave the Arab leverage in the world. Without oil as leverage, the Arab is just a camel rider.

Good-Ole-Rebel

As a Christian, you're not even supposed to want the temple to be rebuilt. Such a thing was taken to be a sign of the coming of the Antichrist, in traditional Christian thought.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

What if you don't have to build it over Al Aqsa? Consider the possibility that the Earth rotates and that it also revolves about a Sun which is traveling through an enormous galaxy. Let us, for sake of discussion, assume that to be the case. Were any of the temples ever built on the same spot?

The Temple must be built on the same spot as that spot was dictated by God. (2 Sam. 24:13-18) Just as He chose Jerusalem, (2 Chron. 6:6), as the city, so He chose the very spot for the Temple.

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

As a Christian, you're not even supposed to want the temple to be rebuilt. Such a thing was taken to be a sign of the coming of the Antichrist, in traditional Christian thought.

That the Temple will be built under anti-christ's authority matters not. The second Temple was built under the authority of the Persians. The Temple in Jesus day was the temple of Herod. The Pharisees and religious leaders were always at odds with Jesus, yet He always obeyed the Law and referred to those He healed to go to the the priests of the Temple and obey the periods of purification.

That place is His place.

Plus, that will not be the final Temple built. The Millennial Temple will be built in a future day. (Ez. 40-47)

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[amorphous_constellation]

Also stoning in Judaism isn't, iirc, the throwing of stones at a person.

What you wrote might then question the veracity of the account in John then, where it appears that 'stoning' seems to be central to what they wanted to do. Also if it was as complicated as you wrote, and they were about to carry it out on the women in John, why would they then stop the process by listening to one statement from a random traveler?

 

[Rival]

What you wrote might then question the veracity of the account in John then, where it appears that 'stoning' seems to be central to what they wanted to do. Also if it was as complicated as you wrote, and they were about to carry it out on the women in John, why would they then stop the process by listening to one statement from a random traveler?

I don't believe any of that happened. I think the stories are made up by people unfamiliar with Jewish practice, so they don't fit the protocol. Scholars also believe the story of the woman caught in adultery is a later addition.

 

[Good-Ole-Rebel]

What you wrote might then question the veracity of the account in John then, where it appears that 'stoning' seems to be central to what they wanted to do. Also if it was as complicated as you wrote, and they were about to carry it out on the women in John, why would they then stop the process by listening to one statement from a random traveler?

My opinion is that it had to do with what Jesus wrote in the dirt for all to see. (John 8:6-8)

Good-Ole-Rebel

 

[Baroodi]

There is no stoning in Islam. Adultery punishment as stated in Quran is 80 slashes non-hurting physically as indicated in Chapter 3 Surat El Nisa (The women). It Says the punishment for the married slaves is half of a free woman. Stoning to death can not be halved.

 

[Brickjectivity]

The Temple must be built on the same spot as that spot was dictated by God. (2 Sam. 24:13-18) Just as He chose Jerusalem, (2 Chron. 6:6), as the city, so He chose the very spot for the Temple.

Good-Ole-Rebel

Perhaps someone could interpret that differently such as by translating Jerusalem to 'City of Peace' rather than transliterating it as Jerusalem? I can't claim to have an opinion on it, because I don't know much about translation. I don't see anything wrong with questioning assumptions as long as its polite.

 

[Terry Sampson]

As a Christian, you're not even supposed to want the temple to be rebuilt.

Sez who?

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Sez who?

Because Jesus has made it unnecessary, as he is the new temple and the high priest. From what I recall, Christians tended to view the destruction of the temple as a judgement of God.