Well, I sure hope he likes sitcoms.

He probably likes "the big bang theory" the best!...lol

Either that, or that book that people in the Mediterranean region wrote about him claiming that he told them to stone each other to death.

Did you see that one?

It's got a lot of silly stuff in it. It's a genuine comic book. Owl bet he had a real belly laugh on that one.

guess I'm not familier with that book, what's it called?

Check out Deuteronomy. If you want I can conglomerate the stonings Here ya go.


For touching Mount Sinai

For taking "accursed things"

For cursing or blaspheming (taking the lord's name in vain)

For adultery (including urban rape victims who fail to scream loud enough)

For animals (like an ox that gores a human)

For a woman who is not a virgin on her wedding night

For worshiping other gods

For disobeying parents

For being caught impersonating a Witch or a Wizard

For giving your children to Molech

For breaking the Sabbath

For cursing the king

There are more insufficient causes to stone someone but Im tired.

so why are we here then if it's not just to entertain God! surely one of you wise pisser's can answere that!

42

-Kerry O.

To entertain ourselves.

To learn bad language from you???

this is why one doesn't take such biblical points so seriously.

the early hebrews apparently rejected such punishments in practice. the restrictions imposed by the jewish court on the potential use of stoning as a punishment were so severe as to make it virtually impossible to impose such a judgement. if however stoning were ever to be imposed by the court then according to the hebrew book of biblical interpretation the talmud, the person being stoned must be killed by the first stone instantaneously - by a large stone being pushed off a cliff for example.

it is less boring that some of the detailed passages of who begot who though.



From the Wiki...

"In the Torah, stoning is specifically prescribed as the method of execution for crimes such as blasphemy, apostasy and one form of adultery (under very specific conditions).

However, the Talmud limits the use of the death penalty to Jewish criminals who: (a) while about to do the crime were warned not to commit the crime while in the presence of two witnesses (and only individuals who meet a strict list of standards are considered acceptable witnesses); and (b) having been warned, committed the crime in front of the same two witnesses.[citation needed]

The Talmudic restriction on how stoning is to be carried out differs from the type of stoning commonly assumed, such as the type implied by the Gospel of John chapter 8 in the New Testament. According to the Jewish Oral Law, after the Jewish criminal has been determined as guilty before the Great Sanhedrin, the two valid witnesses and the sentenced criminal go to the edge of a high place. From there the two witnesses are to push the criminal off. After the criminal has fallen, the two witnesses are to drop a large boulder onto the criminal - requiring both of the witnesses to lift the boulder together. If the criminal did not die from the fall or from the crushing of the large boulder, then any people in the surrounding area are to quickly cause him to die by stoning with whatever rocks they can find. It must be noted though that the practice has for many hundreds of years been considered inhumane by all religious and secular scholars and would never be used.

Stoning has never been a legal form of punishment in the State of Israel."

Apparently these restrictions were so severe that stoning was never used as punishment by the jewish courts who were/are arguably the best original interpreters of the meaning of the bible (old testament).

So humans feel that the directive from their "Heaven Father" is inhumane.

Hmmm?

Sounds like mere mortal men have more compassion than the biblical God.

Why am I not surprised?

Clearly there's something wrong with the doctrine.

Either the doctine isn't the word of God, or God is less compassionate than mortal men.

I choose to believe the former and just reject the Bible as total manmade lies.

Done deal.

NEXT!

or god inspires compassion in humankind in part
through these parables. think. as you say,
these are not the words of god.

I truly understand what you are saying S1ow. Truly I do.

I have absolutely nothing against the religion when used as a personal spiritual experience.

If all Christians would do that there wouldn't be a problem with the religion at all.

The problem stems from those Christians who insist that anyone who doesn't accept the Bible as the word of God is worshiping Satan and has rejected God.

The problem stem from those Christians who basically judge eveyone who refuses to accept Jesus Christ as their lord and savior to be less than righteous people.


The problem stem from those Christians who denounce science and evolution as being the evil work of the devil and demand that we teach their version and understanding of the Bible to our children in public schools.

The problem stem from those Christians who tell other people who they are allowed to love, and not love based on gender, or whatever.

The problem stem from those Christians who have decided that they hold the highest moral values direct from God any anyone who disagrees with them is a lesser person.

The problem stem from those Christians who feel that a Muslims are worshiping Satan and have fallen away from God.

The problem stem from those Christians who feel that Jews have been mislead and are being blinded to the truth of Jesus Christ.

The problem stem from those Christians who tell eveyone who doesn't believe that like them that they are rejecting God and worshiping Satan.

Those bigoted Christians need to wise up.

That's not even what Jesus taught. They absuse Jesus and use the Old Testament to clobbler people over the head with calling them unrighteous, impious sinnsers who are worshiping Satan.

Those are the Christians who are full of hate and need to get over themselves. They don't even represent Jesus at all. Jesus would not condone their bigotry and hatred of people who don't believe like they do.

But I agree with you. The Bible is great for normal people who aren't obscessed with trying to become God.

If only churches could teach the Christians what the parable of Christ was really about we might get somewhere.

But instead the Christians are still chomping at the bit to burn heathens at the stake and the only thing that's stopping them is the manmade laws.

Thank God for the atheists!

Our true saviors.

S1owhand,

Either way its a bad endorsement for the religion. If the instances of stoning depicted in the bible never took place because man actually found these laws to be horrific and unimaginable than like Abra mentioned, that would only demonstrate that humans (descendants of chimps) have more compassion and are capable of demonstrating mercy. However I have to tell you that from a cultural standpoint, I find it hard to believe that not one person ever met an unwarranted death over this stupidity. Im sure it took place and the occurrence that really bothers me is the fact that very young females (perhaps even as young as 14) might have been executed or brutally tortured for being perceived non virgins. I have a feeling that "law" was enforced to the hilt.

many stoning took place, usually in the name of justice, figure that one out, you'll have to ,I can't, other than possibly people were not able to look at themselves first!

Well, even in the New Testament people were supposedly still stoning people to death. I'm sure the woman at the well was not a single unique event. In fact, if Jesus ran into that sort of thing it must have been going on pretty frequently.

Moreover, it certainly wouldn't have stopped on the day Jesus said to not do it anymore. People didn't have telephones, or TV, or radio, or anything. Also, not everyone would agree that Jesus has the authority to CHANGE the laws of God.

If they were stoning sinners in the days of Jesus, they probably continued to stone them for quite a few decades after that. The modern gospels weren't even written for several decades after the rumors of Jesus, and it would have taken serveral more decades to establish them into an organized religious establishment. So lots of sinners would have been stoned in the meantime.

Not to mention all the people who would have been stoned prior to the teachings of Jesus.

We can only imagine that there would have been thousands of people over history who had been stoned to death in the NAME of the biblical God!

We know that Chrsitians have been brutal as hell, even after Christ. Even those who supposedly believed in Christ were burning witches at the stakes, beheading people, and murdering 'heathens'.

They were even doing these things in America! Nearly 2000 years after the teachings of Christ.

Christians are SLOW LEARNERS evidently.

In fact, it was probably the atheists who finally put an end to it by making manmade laws against killing people.

Clearly the Christians never seemed to have a problem with murder in the name of God.

Many Christians today would probably run out and start murdering heathens in the name of God if the goverment were willing to issue them a license to do so.

It's not God that's keeping Christians morally sound. It's the manmade laws of the land!

Yes I agree Abracadabra and also there are STILL atrocities of this type taking place in the world. Women are very often targeted. In Africa for at least (maybe further back) 2000 years, clitoral mutilation has taken place. The idea is a woman's clitoris is considered evil. This "operation" is performed under unsanitary conditions generally to prepubescent females before their arranged marriages. They very often die due to infection post op. Amnesty International has gotten on that practice big time however. I volunteered for them in college but its a lot more of a mess than they can handle.

I see what you mean now. Arkdanimal sarcastically saying, "surely one of you wise pisser's can answere that!" is not very loving or Christian. The comment also reeks of someone not educated with both grammar and spelling mistakes. Normally I try not to say anything bad about anyone but it seems like this guy is just out to insult people.

A much-discussed alternative to homogeneous big-bang nucleosynthesis has been the first-order quark-hadron phase-transition-inspired inhomogeneous model.

And that was one of his good days