|
XianDominSJ -> RE: "Christian" BDSM? (11/7/2006 10:24:58 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: sublizzie
What I find the most interesting in that particular story is that only the woman was brought to Jesus for judgement. According to the Law, both people were to be condemned and stoned since Jesus was told they were "caught in the very act". Makes me wonder what Jesus wrote in the dust. Maybe the Law that pertained to the situation?
Sublizzie,
First, a couple of things about this story (John 7:53-8:11). The most notable is the fact that it does not occur in many early manuscripts prior to several hundred years A.D., and where it does appear usually occurs either after the 21st chapter of Luke or in its current place at the end of John 7. Nor did the early Christian writers (e.g., Tertullian, Origen) cite it in even when discussing cases or matters in which it made perfect sense to do so, although that in itself is not proof of anything. There are many reasons why a Christian writer may wish to avoid citing certain Scriptures which may not do well in the case are trying to present. This just simply means we must know our Bibles so as not to be led astray by those who may not tell us the full story.
But let's assume the story is accurate. You are correct that under Old Testament law both parties were to have been stoned, upon proper conviction of course. That leads to the first problem with this story: this was a trial wherein only one adulterous party stood charges. Also, under the law, two witnesses had to be presented and they could not contradict one another (contradictory witness statements were grounds for automatic acquittal; a major reason why the Jewish leaders could not convict Jesus in their own court). Further, the Jewish leaders were trying to get Jesus to condemn this woman to be stoned to death. While this may have been permissible under Jewish law, it was not allowed under Roman law. Roman rule had stripped the Jews of the ability to execute citizens. Thus, the Jewish leaders were setting up Jesus to try and get him to sentence a woman to death when in fact such a pronouncement was illegal under Roman law. They were trying to get Jesus to simultaneously violate Old Testament law and Roman law in hopes that if he didn't he would appear lax on the issue of adultery. Bottom line: no two guilty parties at trial, no two substantiating witnesses, and no legal means by which to enforce the sentence. The whole thing was a sham, just like the trial He would later phase. Of course, 2000 years later the dynamics of ancient Roman and Jewish legal procedures are sometimes lost on the modern reader.
As for what He was writing in the sand, we have absolutely no idea. As heartfeltsub mentioned, he could've been writing about the sins which they had committed themselves. Or, he could have been recounting for them the provisions of their own Law which they were violating. When He said, "Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her," Jesus was not necessarily making a statement against the death penalty or trying to say that none of us can hold an opinion on the behavior of another. Rather, each one of them was seeking to judge, condemn, and execute this woman apart from the authority of Law and thus do so on their own authority -- only God, who alone is without sin, has that power.
|
|
|
|
