A Young Woman Stoned for Adultery

[Mertex]

Fortunately, those of us with complete brains have a right hemisphere, which gives us the context, which tells us an ancient cultural artifact that has been recorded all over the world from ancient Rome to the Aztec empire, and still goes on prominently in the Subcontinent today (where its perps happen to be Hindus and Sikhs) cannot possibly have had any kind of roots in "Islam".

The Holey Babble story referenced in the OP --- in which Jesus walks up to stop a stoning about to take place --- in itself tells us it was already extant THEN --- some six centuries before Mohammad was even born.

Linear time, vacuum-brain.

Incidentally it's not a "history lesson" as much as Anthropology. But the fact that you regard such crucial background info as "dumb" and would rather run with hair-on-fire bigotry because your head isn't big enough to accommodate realities, just confirms my signline all over again.


Hey Gasbag ----

36 simultaneous tsunamis have wiped out the city of Port Fart, Idaho. This opened up a crevice in the continental shelf that sent the entire slab of western North America out to the Pacific Ocean where it declared itself the independent country of Canadifornia and launched five nukes at your house three minutes ago.

I don't have a link though.

You buyin'? Or are you gonna "deflect" asking for "evidence"?

Better run, dumbass.

Who at any time said that stonings didn't take place before Islam? Is that issue? No. You want to make it the issue though to ignore the real issue(s). Just like you want to trifle over links (habitually) to avoid the issue(s). Your game is stale and old. If you don't like being called out, address the actual issue at hand for once.

Several of your fellow traveler ignorami have done so, and as noted they've been refuted repeatedly, but within the confines of this thread --- YOU did:

This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it.

--- which ironically was immediately followed by another sentence that shoots the first directly in the foot:

Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

-- and it ain't what "I think" the origin is -- it's what it IS is. Your burying your head in the sand pretending that some ancient tribal custom with no religious roots is "religious" -- doesn't make it so just because you choose a path of bigoted ignorance, that being all your tiny little mind can grapple with.

Once again, even in the OP you have the same thing going on in a biblical story..... six hundred years before Mohammad was even born. Does that event have "Islam fingerprints all over it"? Or was it Jewish fingerprints, and six hundred years later they traded it to Islam for cash and a player to be named later?

Dumb fuck.

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

 

[irosie91]

Who at any time said that stonings didn't take place before Islam? Is that issue? No. You want to make it the issue though to ignore the real issue(s). Just like you want to trifle over links (habitually) to avoid the issue(s). Your game is stale and old. If you don't like being called out, address the actual issue at hand for once.

Several of your fellow traveler ignorami have done so, and as noted they've been refuted repeatedly, but within the confines of this thread --- YOU did:

This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it.

--- which ironically was immediately followed by another sentence that shoots the first directly in the foot:

Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

-- and it ain't what "I think" the origin is -- it's what it IS is. Your burying your head in the sand pretending that some ancient tribal custom with no religious roots is "religious" -- doesn't make it so just because you choose a path of bigoted ignorance, that being all your tiny little mind can grapple with.

Once again, even in the OP you have the same thing going on in a biblical story..... six hundred years before Mohammad was even born. Does that event have "Islam fingerprints all over it"? Or was it Jewish fingerprints, and six hundred years later they traded it to Islam for cash and a player to be named later?

Dumb fuck.

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

 

[Pogo]

Who at any time said that stonings didn't take place before Islam? Is that issue? No. You want to make it the issue though to ignore the real issue(s). Just like you want to trifle over links (habitually) to avoid the issue(s). Your game is stale and old. If you don't like being called out, address the actual issue at hand for once.

Several of your fellow traveler ignorami have done so, and as noted they've been refuted repeatedly, but within the confines of this thread --- YOU did:

This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it.

--- which ironically was immediately followed by another sentence that shoots the first directly in the foot:

Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

-- and it ain't what "I think" the origin is -- it's what it IS is. Your burying your head in the sand pretending that some ancient tribal custom with no religious roots is "religious" -- doesn't make it so just because you choose a path of bigoted ignorance, that being all your tiny little mind can grapple with.

Once again, even in the OP you have the same thing going on in a biblical story..... six hundred years before Mohammad was even born. Does that event have "Islam fingerprints all over it"? Or was it Jewish fingerprints, and six hundred years later they traded it to Islam for cash and a player to be named later?

Dumb fuck.

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

I don't think Rosie's ever linked anything ever. And we did all this before, stonings and exhortations to stoning are all over the OT:

Deuteronomy 21:18-21
“If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son who will not obey the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and, though they discipline him, will not listen to them, then his father and his mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city at the gate of the place where he lives, and they shall say to the elders of his city, ‘This our son is stubborn and rebellious; he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton and a drunkard.’ Then all the men of the city shall stone him to death with stones. So you shall purge the evil from your midst, and all Israel shall hear, and fear.

Leviticus 24:16
Whoever blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall stone him. The sojourner as well as the native, when he blasphemes the Name, shall be put to death.

Acts 7:59-60
And as they were stoning Stephen, he called out, “Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.” And falling to his knees he cried out with a loud voice, “Lord, do not hold this sin against them.” And when he had said this, he fell asleep.

Numbers 15:32-36
While the people of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day. And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron and to all the congregation. They put him in custody, because it had not been made clear what should be done to him. And the Lord said to Moses, “The man shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” And all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him to death with stones, as the Lord commanded Moses.

Leviticus 20:27
“A man or a woman who is a medium or a necromancer shall surely be put to death. They shall be stoned with stones; their blood shall be upon them.”

Deuteronomy 13:10
You shall stone him to death with stones, because he sought to draw you away from the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.

(all listed here)

"Everybody must get stoned" --- Bob Dylan

 

[Picaro]

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

Joachim Jeremias' book Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus is an excellent book on Jewish politics and culture in that era.

Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus: An Investigation into Economic & Social Conditions During the New Testament Period, trans. F. H. Cave and C. H. Cave (1969; German ed.: 1967)

Joachim Jeremias - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Recently re-published in hardback. Well worth the price for those with a real interest in history and the environment that incubated Christianity; it provides plenty of context for much of the New Testament and passages that a lot of people find confusing. Some reviews here:

Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus (CBD Exclusive!)

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

The Jews killed 2000 Palestinians last year. Most of them women and children.

Israel ain't in the business of assassinating innocents. You can keep your Muslim Brotherhood propaganda to yourself.

 

[Mertex]

Several of your fellow traveler ignorami have done so, and as noted they've been refuted repeatedly, but within the confines of this thread --- YOU did:

--- which ironically was immediately followed by another sentence that shoots the first directly in the foot:

-- and it ain't what "I think" the origin is -- it's what it IS is. Your burying your head in the sand pretending that some ancient tribal custom with no religious roots is "religious" -- doesn't make it so just because you choose a path of bigoted ignorance, that being all your tiny little mind can grapple with.

Once again, even in the OP you have the same thing going on in a biblical story..... six hundred years before Mohammad was even born. Does that event have "Islam fingerprints all over it"? Or was it Jewish fingerprints, and six hundred years later they traded it to Islam for cash and a player to be named later?

Dumb fuck.

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

 

[Pogo]

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

She's peddled it before -- what she's trying to do is imply that the heavy editing at the Coucil of Nicea in the fourth century might have "inserted" that story in there, rather than it being original material. She tried that with me. While there was a lot of editing going on at Nicea, what she forgets is (a) even if it were true, 325 AD is still three centuries before Mohammad was even born, and (b) there are all those references to, and even orders from God to, stonings in the Old Testament, as I listed twice earlier, which are still older, some easily a thousand years or more before Mohammad. Not to mention failing to supply any reason Constantine and/or the Council would have had to insert a stoning where none had existed.

Rosie's got challenges with (a) linear time, (b) linking anything, and (c) trying to run the same song and dance that's already been disproven, looking for a different result.

 

[Picaro]

the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.
Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---
according to jewish law and in the life-time of jesus ONLY BY ROME
according to the NT. ie----the story is not history. The nicest
thing that anyone could say about it is----it's a "parable" -----but
the reality is----more likely----it is a lie. However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women. There is
no actual record of any such executions-------none---except one-----
JAMES during the time that decrees of execution could be issued
only by ROME. It could have been a mob lynching

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

While it wasn't written down, it was being transmitted orally before that, as was the norm for much of Jewish theology; the first Christians were mostly Jewish, after all, and in the beginnings they preached from the Jewish Temple, until the persecutions began anyway.

The 'orthodox' version won out because they were by far the most extant and accepted; the claims that the Romans and Constantine rewrote it all and excluded some vast amount of Gospels is just nonsense, based on finding a few scrolls and expanding their importance in typical conspiracy theory fashion into some sort of fiction of a huge majority of Xians, when in fact they were very minor and scattered offshoots of no importance. The Gnostics weren't Christians, in any case, just sophists and in many cases liars and forgers, as were the 'Arianists' and others.

 

[Mertex]

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

She's peddled it before -- what she's trying to do is imply that the heavy editing at the Coucil of Nicea in the fourth century might have "inserted" that story in there, rather than it being original material. She tried that with me. While there was a lot of editing going on at Nicea, what she forgets is (a) even if it were true, 325 AD is still three centuries before Mohammad was even born, and (b) there are all those references to, and even orders from God to, stonings in the Old Testament, as I listed twice earlier, which are still older, some easily a thousand years or more before Mohammad. Not to mention failing to supply any reason Constantine and/or the Council would have had to insert a stoning where none had existed.

Rosie's got challenges with (a) linear time, (b) linking anything, and (c) trying to run the same song and dance that's already been disproven, looking for a different result.

Not only that.......her language (Da Joos) makes her no better than the terrorists we are having to deal currently.

 

[irosie91]

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

She's peddled it before -- what she's trying to do is imply that the heavy editing at the Coucil of Nicea in the fourth century might have "inserted" that story in there, rather than it being original material. She tried that with me. While there was a lot of editing going on at Nicea, what she forgets is (a) even if it were true, 325 AD is still three centuries before Mohammad was even born, and (b) there are all those references to, and even orders from God to, stonings in the Old Testament, as I listed twice earlier, which are still older, some easily a thousand years or more before Mohammad. Not to mention failing to supply any reason Constantine and/or the Council would have had to insert a stoning where none had existed.

Rosie's got challenges with (a) linear time, (b) linking anything, and (c) trying to run the same song and dance that's already been disproven, looking for a different result.

Not only that.......her language (Da Joos) makes her no better than the terrorists we are having to deal currently.

using the term "DA JOOOS" makes me one of the infant throat slitting rapists whose asses you lick? You have asserted that the gospel describing the
putative event that a whole bunch of gangsters dragged a woman into the gutter
and tried to execute her without benefit of a trial for "adultery" was WITNESSED
by a person who "walked and talked" to Jesus----- YEAH ??? and just who was that? BTW Luke never met jesus and did not even speak his language

 

[irosie91]

BTW mertex has admitted that the contention of Christian scholars that
the romans removed the right of jews to execute people is a pile of shit lies

 

[irosie91]

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

She's peddled it before -- what she's trying to do is imply that the heavy editing at the Coucil of Nicea in the fourth century might have "inserted" that story in there, rather than it being original material. She tried that with me. While there was a lot of editing going on at Nicea, what she forgets is (a) even if it were true, 325 AD is still three centuries before Mohammad was even born, and (b) there are all those references to, and even orders from God to, stonings in the Old Testament, as I listed twice earlier, which are still older, some easily a thousand years or more before Mohammad. Not to mention failing to supply any reason Constantine and/or the Council would have had to insert a stoning where none had existed.

Rosie's got challenges with (a) linear time, (b) linking anything, and (c) trying to run the same song and dance that's already been disproven, looking for a different result.

Mertex "agrees" with pogo's idiotic reconstruction------part of which includes his
FASCINATING REVELATION that Muhummad was born hundreds of years after
the Council of Nicea was convened WATT GENIUSES The finale-----POGO INSISTS that that he has PROVEN that the story of Pharisees dragging an adulteress into the gutter to stone her without benefit of trial is ------a kinda
normal event in the time of Jesus. Pogo spits on the claim by Christian scholars
that ROME has utterly removed the right of jewish courts or jews in general to
issue death sentences------SPIT POGO SPIT_------mertex loves your disdain for
Christian claims

 

[irosie91]

It is not a parable........it is an event that happened and recorded in the NT. You don't have to believe it, but you have no proof that it is a lie. And, your assertion that there is no record of any such executions......is the lie.


2 At dawn he appeared again in the temple courts, where all the people gathered around him, and he sat down to teach them. 3 The teachers of the law and the Pharisees brought in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before the group 4 and said to Jesus, “Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. 5 In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?” 6 They were using this question as a trap, in order to have a basis for accusing him.

But Jesus bent down and started to write on the ground with his finger. 7 When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her.” 8 Again he stooped down and wrote on the ground.

9 At this, those who heard began to go away one at a time, the older ones first, until only Jesus was left, with the woman still standing there. 10 Jesus straightened up and asked her, “Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?”

The situation in Israel/Judea during the putative life-time of Jesus is WELL DOCUMENTED-------In fact Christian theologians have INSISTED for almost
the past 2000 years that ------the ONLY REASON THAT DA JOOOS did not execute Jesus is because the romans stripped DA JEWISH COURTS of the right to execute
ANYONE. However----beyond that assertion is the FACT that executions
for any person under jewish law at THAT TIME had to be adjudicated in the SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM------not a bunch of people in the gutter.
FURTHERMORE------by that time----execution for adultery was actually not
being DONE------especially when PHARISEES were involved-----their policy
was regarding "execution" FIND A LOOPHOLE. Adultery was not treated
like a lynch party------this stuff is WELL DOCUMENTED. Read the NT----if
you can actually READ----with discernment-------it is all there. What happened
to JESUS when he went to TRIAL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIN? was he
sentenced to death? I am generously willing to treat the story as a parable----
in fact-----it is a fraud

Don't give me credit for your gibberish.......which I noticed you didn't even link. Yep, the situation in Israel/Judea during the lifetime of Jesus is well documented.....and yet some still choose to pick and choose which "documented" versions they will believe. The Pharisees were probably not looking to actually execute the woman but merely looking for a way to trap Jesus and there is no reason to doubt that it actually happened.

In the third century, the writer of the church order the Didascalia Apostolorum invoked Jesus’s treatment of the adulteress to illustrate God’s exceptional mercy. This writer did not know the passage from John, but that did not stop him from perceiving it as an authentic story about Jesus. Similar attitudes can be found among other ancient Christians. The Egyptian theologian Didymus the Blind (circa 313–398 C.E.), for example, cited Jesus’s response to the adulteress to exhort bishops to be compassionate when judging sinners, even as he acknowledged that the story was found only in “certain Gospels.” Similarly, Jerome (circa 347–420 C.E.) cited the passage and included it in the Vulgate, while also openly admitting that it was missing from some copies of John. Augustine of Hippo (354–430 C.E.) developed a novel solution to the story’s odd history: he was of the opinion that a man should not divorce his wife, even on account of adultery, and he accused those who disagreed with him of maliciously editing the story out. Nevertheless, all of these writers viewed this story as fully part of the Christian tradition, worrying less about its absence from an accepted Gospel book than about the meanings they found in it.
The Woman Caught in Adultery


There is more evidence for the Bible’s authenticity than for any literature of antiquity. Textual analysis begins with historical investigation, beginning with the latest documents and working backward. As evidence develops, the data is evaluated against other sources. The record is then checked for consistency of information, and the claims are analyzed as if it were a legal case, looking for credible testimony with cross-examination. There is an enormous amount of evidence for authenticity of the biblical manuscripts.
The Manuscripts | The Institute for Creation Research

You are citing the "OPINIONS" of people who had nothing to do with the events and knew nothing about the practices of the day------something like me trying to
interpret the ODYSSEY. -------- More than 200 years after an event vaguely described
by writers that never met jesus. Use your head. I have no doubt that the bible of today compares favorably with that which was put together by the NICEAN COUNCIL so what? Your allusion to 'biblical manuscripts" are just
that--------nothing more. You got something written by Jesus or Mary or John the Baptist?

Your statement just shows how ignorant you truly are and that you really don't know enough about the Bible to be arguing over it. The NT wasn't written at the exact time that Jesus was on earth, but the authors of many of the NT books did walk with Jesus and did know about the events and practices of the day because they were alive and lived there during that time. Also, it wasn't written 200 years after.....another indication that you really don't know what you are talking about. Scholars who know and understand a lot more than you do have placed the writing of the New Testament at no later than 62 AD.


Here, acquaint yourself with the authors....so you don't repeat your inane comment that the writers never met Jesus.


BRIEF BIOGRAPHY OF EACH AUTHOR:

1. Matthew: Mathew, also known as Levi, was a publican or tax collector who was chosen by Jesus to be one of the twelve Apostles. As a tax collector Matthew would have been a literate person well suited to author one of the gospel records. Early church tradition credits Matthew with the authorship of the gospel bearing his name.

2. Mark: This disciple is given credit by the early church as the author of the Gospel bearing his name. Mark was the Latin surname given to this young man who's Jewish name was John. John Mark was cousin to Barnabas a prominent figure in the early church. Mark traveled with his cousin Barnabas in ministry and later in years ministered to the Apostles Peter and Paul. Mark is not identified as one who walked with Jesus yet his association with the Apostles makes him more than qualified to produce a gospel record.
(snip)
The Authors of the New Testament


If Acts was written in 62 or before, and Luke was written before Acts (say 60), then Luke was written less than thirty years of the death of Jesus. This is contemporary to the generation who witnessed the events of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. This is precisely what Luke claims in the prologue to his Gospel:

Many have undertaken to draw up a record of the things that have been fulfilled among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who were eye-witnesses and servants of the word. Therefore, since I myself have carefully investigated everything from the beginning, it seemed good also to me to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, so that you may know the certainty of the things you have been taught. [5uke 1:1-4]

Luke presents the same information about who Jesus is, what he taught, and his death and resurrection as do the other Gospels. Thus, there is not a reason to reject their historical accuracy either.

The Dating of the New Testament


Go peddle your nonsense elsewhere.

While it wasn't written down, it was being transmitted orally before that, as was the norm for much of Jewish theology; the first Christians were mostly Jewish, after all, and in the beginnings they preached from the Jewish Temple, until the persecutions began anyway.

The 'orthodox' version won out because they were by far the most extant and accepted; the claims that the Romans and Constantine rewrote it all and excluded some vast amount of Gospels is just nonsense, based on finding a few scrolls and expanding their importance in typical conspiracy theory fashion into some sort of fiction of a huge majority of Xians, when in fact they were very minor and scattered offshoots of no importance. The Gnostics weren't Christians, in any case, just sophists and in many cases liars and forgers, as were the 'Arianists' and others.

while not as confused as is Mertex regarding jewish theology and ethos----
You are still confused, Picaro. What jewish "theology" was transmitted orally?
I am not suggesting that there was no unwritten stuff that eventually got
put in books------but just to what do YOU refer? The psalms? Genesis?

for the record-----the story of jesus and the adulteress about to be stoned
by "Pharisees"--------does not make any sense at all unless the event can
be described as an ILLEGAL LYNCHING-----something like southern Christians
did to blacks they accused of "touching a white woman" Ie---the NT is describing that which would be a crime in the Jurisprudence of the day----not
a PRACTICE

 

[JoeB131]

Now I get it. You hate Israel.

What are the solutions, baking cookies and singing songs?

Yes, I do hate Religious Apartheid states that antagonize a whole region against us.

My solution is pretty simple. We stop supporting Israel. We stop sticking our noses in their business.

They aren't attacking us because they "hate our freedom". They aren't attacking Costa Rica, they aren't attacking Japan.

 

[JoeB131]

Always willing for someone else to do the job you're either incapable or too much of a pussy to do yourself. More like a combination of both with varying degrees of inability and pussy fluctuating day to day.

No, guy, you are a little confused. You shitheads talk smack all day about how you want to go to war with these people, but you usually don't go down to a recruiters office and sign up.

You see, what I would do, I would have a universal draft. And if you are the kid of a politician or a CEO or a loud-mouth asshole on hate radio, you get put in the special elite airborne unit that will be the first deployed.

Betcha we won't be so keen to go to war after that.

 

[JoeB131]

The Jews killed 2000 Palestinians last year. Most of them women and children.

Israel ain't in the business of assassinating innocents. You can keep your Muslim Brotherhood propaganda to yourself.

Hey, guys, even ISRAELI sources admit that was the case.

Here you go, from Haertz- an Israeli publication.

Report finds high civilian death toll during Gaza war - Diplomacy and Defense

The youngest to die was a 4-day-old girl, the oldest a 92-year-old man.
They were among at least 844 Palestinians killed as a result of airstrikes on homes during Israel's summer war with the Islamic militant group, Hamas.
....
According to preliminary U.N. figures, at least 1,483 Palestinian civilians were killed in the war - 66 percent of the overall death toll of 2,205.

 

[Conservative65]

Always willing for someone else to do the job you're either incapable or too much of a pussy to do yourself. More like a combination of both with varying degrees of inability and pussy fluctuating day to day.

No, guy, you are a little confused. You shitheads talk smack all day about how you want to go to war with these people, but you usually don't go down to a recruiters office and sign up.

You see, what I would do, I would have a universal draft. And if you are the kid of a politician or a CEO or a loud-mouth asshole on hate radio, you get put in the special elite airborne unit that will be the first deployed.

Betcha we won't be so keen to go to war after that.

Universal draft? Does that mean you are included or do you not know what universal means.

 

[JoeB131]

Universal draft? Does that mean you are included or do you not know what universal means.

I already have my DD214, thanks.

 

[Conservative65]

Universal draft? Does that mean you are included or do you not know what universal means.

I already have my DD214, thanks.

Universal means all dumbass. That includes you.

 

[ChrisL]

Muslim clerics who are "scholars of Islam" say that stoning is a "prescribed" punishment by Muhammed.

Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Stoning - WikiIslam