A Young Woman Stoned for Adultery

As I suspected -- an "honor killing". It's an ancient tribal custom enacted for social control that predates Islam, Christianism, Sikhism, Hinduism and every other religion where it still takes place. It's fucked up, it's primitive, it's based on archconservative hyperpatriarchy --- but it's got nothing to do with religion. It has to do with women scaring the shit out of men so they get violent about it. The last quoted sentence underscores that.

Not religious. Just as the Gospel event cited in the OP would have had nothing to do with Judaism. It dates back thousands of years to nomadic tribes jealous of their possessions.

You're welcome.

Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go :lalala: ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

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.


And I hate to break it to you Pinko but the OP starts with a reference to an event with no link, and therefore no basis, and therefore no definition. Without a definition it cannot serve as a basis.

Moreover that citation contained an analysis (religion as causation) which I suspected was erroneous, and now with Gasbag's link that erronity has been confirmed.

Low hangin' fruit. Yum.
An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

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.
 
Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go :lalala: ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

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.


An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

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
 
Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go :lalala: ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

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.


The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

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

So, this thread is about Jews stoning women 2,000 years ago?
 
Give me a break. This thing has Islam fingerprints all over it. Who gives a sh** what you think the origin of this "custom" is.

Too bad for your ignorant bigot ass it was already thousands of years old when Mohammed was born huh Sparky??

Once again you have nothing but vague wisps of disjointed suspicions. "Has Islam fingerprints all over it". Suck my ass, you ignorant swine.

How many times have we spelled this shit out while you bigots go :lalala: ?

>> In many Arab countries, the practice of honour killing dates back to pre-Islamic times when Arab settlers occupied a region adjacent to Sindh, known as Baluchistan (in Pakistan).57 These Arab settlers had patriarchal traditions such as live burials of newly born daughters. Such traditions trace back to the earliest historic times of Ancient Babylon, where the predominant view was that a woman's virginity belonged to her family.58

There is no mention of honour killing in the Quran or Hadiths. Honour killing, in Islamic definitions, refers specifically to extra-legal punishment by the family against a woman, and is forbidden by the Sharia (Islamic law). Religious authorities disagree with extra punishments such as honour killing and prohibit it, so the practice of it is a cultural and not a religious issue. However, since Islam has influence over vast numbers of Muslims in many countries and from many cultures, some use Islam to justify honour killing even though there is no support for honour killing in Islam. << -- Origins of Honor Killing

Where's your link to "fingerprints", Iggie-boy?

You want an demon -- go for the patriarchy that creates this shit.

-- or would that hit too close to home?

I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

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.


An OP-ED does not require being confirmed. Only spoken/written.

The story claimed to be an event in it, however, does. Else it's not an event.

I didn't even address the op-ed part of the OP. At all. Wasn't interested in that.

You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

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.

I'm sorry; but how many Jews are stoning people these days? Oh, you'd rather talk about issues that don't matter and aren't pertinent to modern day reality. Got it.
 
the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.

Again --- Constantine wouldn't even be BORN for another 250 years. Linear time striketh again.

However ---stoning is a method
of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women.

Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?

Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---

This wouldn't be an official "execution" --- it's mob mentality. Public vigilantism. Same as lynching in our own culture.

It could have been a mob lynching
It IS mob lynching. Both then and now.

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.

Doesn't matter whether it's historically factual or not. The fact that there's a reference to it means the setting would have been understood by its audience. The NT could not have described an electrocution --- wouldn't have meant anything in its time. Stoning however already existed so there was no need to explain what it meant.

Matter of fact when some Islamophobe dredges up such a story and trots it out as a pseudoexmple of "Islam" or "Sharia" --- we don't need an explanation of what "stoning" means because --- we all already learned about it from the Bible. From an even written down centuries before there was any such thing as "Islam".
 
Last edited:
I dont' give a fuck that you think forms of murder existed before Islam. That's obvious to anyone with half a brain. The reality is Islam fosters these killings. So, save us your dumbass history lesson, sparky.

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.


You meant to deflect like a little bitch maggot that you are.

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

So, this thread is about Jews stoning women 2,000 years ago?

it seems to have DEVOLVED into the realm of a discussion on who stoned
whom first which is sometimes considered something like "which
religion invented it" ------sorta like arguments over "who invented sliced
bread" Then it gets worse-------if the religion that does it now------DID NOT
INVENT IT------then it has nothing to do with the religious law or custom that prescribes it. I have no idea what religion invented the electric chair but
I have been told that it was a French physician who invented the GUILLOTINE
(spelling?) I am a jew and do not take credit for either the Guillotine
or stoning or circumcision of either gender------not even for bagels. There is
no history of jews stoning women 2000 years ago-----accusations of adultery
were handled in an entirely different manner.
 
the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.

Again --- Constantine wouldn't even be BORN for another 250 years. Linear time striketh again.

rosie >>> the council of Nicea did its thing in 325 AD---the NT ----
the book attributed to "john" is of unknown authorship----both
time and person. john seems to be John Doe it is not
john the Baptist------ie that john is probably a pen name for
a whole bunch of unknown authors

However ---stoning is a method of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women.

Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---

This wouldn't be an official "execution" --- it's mob mentality. Public vigilantism. Same as lynching in our own culture.

rosie >> true-----the NT describes it as an execution by Sanhedrin order------despite
the fact that the Sanhedrin could not issue such an order according to the NT.
I am engaging in sophistry to explain away that contradiction

It could have been a mob lynching
It IS mob lynching. Both then and now.

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.

Doesn't matter whether it's historical or not. The fact that there's a reference to it means the setting would have been understood by its audience. The NT could not have described an electrocution --- wouldn't have meant anything in its time. Stoning however already existed so there was no need to explain what it meant.

rosie>> true -----the audience which read the NT was the holy roman empire
persons -----after 325 AD

Matter of fact when some Islamophobe dredges up such a story and trots it out as a pseudoexmple of "Islam" or "Sharia" --- we don't need an explanation of what "stoning" means because --- we all already learned about it from the Bible. From an even written down centuries before there was any such thing as "Islam".

rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code
of islam I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places
it existed. Interestingly ---it was pretty much dropped from jewish jurisprudence
at the time Jesus lived except for theoretical discussions <<< that means Talmud.
I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout
the whole Levant long before Moses was born
 
the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.

Again --- Constantine wouldn't even be BORN for another 250 years. Linear time striketh again.

rosie >>> the council of Nicea did its thing in 325 AD---the NT ----
the book attributed to "john" is of unknown authorship----both
time and person. john seems to be John Doe it is not
john the Baptist------ie that john is probably a pen name for
a whole bunch of unknown authors

However ---stoning is a method of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women.

Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---

This wouldn't be an official "execution" --- it's mob mentality. Public vigilantism. Same as lynching in our own culture.

rosie >> true-----the NT describes it as an execution by Sanhedrin order------despite
the fact that the Sanhedrin could not issue such an order according to the NT.
I am engaging in sophistry to explain away that contradiction

It could have been a mob lynching
It IS mob lynching. Both then and now.

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.

Doesn't matter whether it's historical or not. The fact that there's a reference to it means the setting would have been understood by its audience. The NT could not have described an electrocution --- wouldn't have meant anything in its time. Stoning however already existed so there was no need to explain what it meant.

rosie>> true -----the audience which read the NT was the holy roman empire
persons -----after 325 AD

Matter of fact when some Islamophobe dredges up such a story and trots it out as a pseudoexmple of "Islam" or "Sharia" --- we don't need an explanation of what "stoning" means because --- we all already learned about it from the Bible. From an even written down centuries before there was any such thing as "Islam".

rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code
of islam I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places
it existed. Interestingly ---it was pretty much dropped from jewish jurisprudence
at the time Jesus lived except for theoretical discussions <<< that means Talmud.
I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout
the whole Levant long before Moses was born

You've completely polluted the exchange by inserting your own passages into my posts.

I shall try to extricate a few choice morsels:

(Me) Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

So you cannot document your assertion, and therefore it fails.


rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code of islam [sic]

Once again, as above ---- care to show us where that is in the Qu'ran?

I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places it existed.

I do, because I took the trouble to find out. And it's not a secret. I've already linked and posted that.


I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout the whole Levant long before Moses was born

Correct, and ergo way before Mohammad was born as well. Which puts it outside the creation of Judaism, Islam, or any other religion. It was (and still is) a social construct, having everything to do with what that community's traditions regard as "honor" and "status" within the community. Which have nothing to do with religions.

I should add that if your prior reference to the "fingerprints of Constantine" refers to the heavy NT editing session going on at the Council of Nicea, that is a fair point to which I am sympathetic, so I grant you that. :thup:

But that still remains three centuries before Mohammad, meaning that Constantine's editors could not have been describing a ritual that would not exist until several centuries into the then-future.
 
the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.

Again --- Constantine wouldn't even be BORN for another 250 years. Linear time striketh again.

rosie >>> the council of Nicea did its thing in 325 AD---the NT ----
the book attributed to "john" is of unknown authorship----both
time and person. john seems to be John Doe it is not
john the Baptist------ie that john is probably a pen name for
a whole bunch of unknown authors

However ---stoning is a method of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women.

Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---

This wouldn't be an official "execution" --- it's mob mentality. Public vigilantism. Same as lynching in our own culture.

rosie >> true-----the NT describes it as an execution by Sanhedrin order------despite
the fact that the Sanhedrin could not issue such an order according to the NT.
I am engaging in sophistry to explain away that contradiction

It could have been a mob lynching
It IS mob lynching. Both then and now.

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.

Doesn't matter whether it's historical or not. The fact that there's a reference to it means the setting would have been understood by its audience. The NT could not have described an electrocution --- wouldn't have meant anything in its time. Stoning however already existed so there was no need to explain what it meant.

rosie>> true -----the audience which read the NT was the holy roman empire
persons -----after 325 AD

Matter of fact when some Islamophobe dredges up such a story and trots it out as a pseudoexmple of "Islam" or "Sharia" --- we don't need an explanation of what "stoning" means because --- we all already learned about it from the Bible. From an even written down centuries before there was any such thing as "Islam".

rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code
of islam I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places
it existed. Interestingly ---it was pretty much dropped from jewish jurisprudence
at the time Jesus lived except for theoretical discussions <<< that means Talmud.
I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout
the whole Levant long before Moses was born

You've completely polluted the exchange by inserting your own passages into my posts.

I shall try to extricate a few choice morsels:

(Me) Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

So you cannot document your assertion, and therefore it fails.


rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code of islam [sic]

Once again, as above ---- care to show us where that is in the Qu'ran?

I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places it existed.

I do, because I took the trouble to find out. And it's not a secret. I've already linked and posted that.


I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout the whole Levant long before Moses was born

Correct, and ergo way before Mohammad was born as well. Which puts it outside the creation of Judaism, Islam, or any other religion. It was (and still is) a social construct, having everything to do with what that community's traditions regard as "honor" and "status" within the community. Which have nothing to do with religions.

I made the fact that I inserted very clear-------Nothing could render your posts
MORE polluted than they are already. Your assertion that stoning adulterers
has nothing to do with ISLAM is idiotic------Shariah law IS ISLAM just as
Torah/Talmudic law IS Judaism and CANON LAW is Catholicism
 
Shariah law IS ISLAM just as
Torah/Talmudic law IS Judaism and CANON LAW is Catholicism

Too bad you can't quote any of those actually prescribing stoning for adultery then. Because then you might actually have a point.

Your assertion that stoning adulterers has nothing to do with ISLAM is idiotic

No, it's called linear time. I can't just walk up to Mount Mitchell and go "hey, I invented this mountain". Why can't I do that? Because that mountain was there thousands of years before I was, that's why.

Go back to part 1 here; lather, rinse , repeat.
 
America is so much more civilized, they use a lethal injection or a firing squad when they carry out the death penalty

upload_2015-11-4_21-43-8.jpeg


Civilized behavior is highly overrated. Let the punishment match the injustice. You want the people who stoned the woman to go quickly and almost painlessly? Then drop a ten ton stone on top of each of them.

*****SMILE*****



:)
 
Last edited:
Shariah law IS ISLAM just as
Torah/Talmudic law IS Judaism and CANON LAW is Catholicism

Too bad you can't quote any of those actually prescribing stoning for adultery then. Because then you might actually have a point.

Your assertion that stoning adulterers has nothing to do with ISLAM is idiotic

No, it's called linear time. I can't just walk up to Mount Mitchell and go "hey, I invented this mountain". Why can't I do that? Because that mountain was there thousands of years before I was, that's why.

Go back to part 1 here; lather, rinse , repeat.

your arguments are idiotic--------since execution of murderers was not INVENTED
by Tom Paine------it has nothing to do with USA jurisprudence. Keep on with your
stupidity-------since the catholics church did not invent paper------bibles in book form have nothing to do with religion
 
the story in the NT has the fingerprints of Constantine all over it.

Again --- Constantine wouldn't even be BORN for another 250 years. Linear time striketh again.

rosie >>> the council of Nicea did its thing in 325 AD---the NT ----
the book attributed to "john" is of unknown authorship----both
time and person. john seems to be John Doe it is not
john the Baptist------ie that john is probably a pen name for
a whole bunch of unknown authors

However ---stoning is a method of execution in jewish law (or was) for both men and women.

Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

Executions could be ordered only by the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem---

This wouldn't be an official "execution" --- it's mob mentality. Public vigilantism. Same as lynching in our own culture.

rosie >> true-----the NT describes it as an execution by Sanhedrin order------despite
the fact that the Sanhedrin could not issue such an order according to the NT.
I am engaging in sophistry to explain away that contradiction

It could have been a mob lynching
It IS mob lynching. Both then and now.

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.

Doesn't matter whether it's historical or not. The fact that there's a reference to it means the setting would have been understood by its audience. The NT could not have described an electrocution --- wouldn't have meant anything in its time. Stoning however already existed so there was no need to explain what it meant.

rosie>> true -----the audience which read the NT was the holy roman empire
persons -----after 325 AD

Matter of fact when some Islamophobe dredges up such a story and trots it out as a pseudoexmple of "Islam" or "Sharia" --- we don't need an explanation of what "stoning" means because --- we all already learned about it from the Bible. From an even written down centuries before there was any such thing as "Islam".

rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code
of islam I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places
it existed. Interestingly ---it was pretty much dropped from jewish jurisprudence
at the time Jesus lived except for theoretical discussions <<< that means Talmud.
I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout
the whole Levant long before Moses was born

You've completely polluted the exchange by inserting your own passages into my posts.

I shall try to extricate a few choice morsels:

(Me) Really. Care to quote where the Torah prescribes stoning then?
rosie >>no------I do not do chapter and verse-----any person who
read the book ----read it.

So you cannot document your assertion, and therefore it fails.


rosie>> true -----from the OT. It was adopted as part of the legal code of islam [sic]

Once again, as above ---- care to show us where that is in the Qu'ran?

I have no idea if it existed already in arabia or in what other places it existed.

I do, because I took the trouble to find out. And it's not a secret. I've already linked and posted that.


I suspect that stoning was a means of execution in arabia and even thruout the whole Levant long before Moses was born

Correct, and ergo way before Mohammad was born as well. Which puts it outside the creation of Judaism, Islam, or any other religion. It was (and still is) a social construct, having everything to do with what that community's traditions regard as "honor" and "status" within the community. Which have nothing to do with religions.

I should add that if your prior reference to the "fingerprints of Constantine" refers to the heavy NT editing session going on at the Council of Nicea, that is a fair point to which I am sympathetic, so I grant you that. :thup:

But that still remains three centuries before Mohammad, meaning that Constantine's editors could not have been describing a ritual that would not exist until several centuries into the then-future.

you made no point at all other than making a fool of yourself by INSISTING----
' if muhummad did not invent stoning people, then it is not part of shariah law---which ---btw----according to Islamic scholars is DIVINELY ORDAINED BY WHAT-HIS-NAME up there in Jannah------divine and eternal
 
If the stoning was "not of god" why is that form of punishment prescribed for so many offenses in the Bible? It seems that particular punishment is justified in all 3 major monotheistic religions.
 
If the stoning was "not of god" why is that form of punishment prescribed for so many offenses in the Bible? It seems that particular punishment is justified in all 3 major monotheistic religions.

"...of god" ???? well-----actually it does not say that it is "of god" in the OT, NT,
or koran. When death is prescribed by heaven -----people are supposed to just
drop dead (or get very sick or get hit with lightening) At least that is the OT form
of execution "of G-d" In the stone age------stones were just about all they had
for a court decree. Lethal injection has not yet been invented
 
We dont have the Death penalty here, you should try it

we really don' t either. which is why I want honest people packing heat. fight crime-shoot back

what about hunting rifles? In the state in which I grew up REAL MEN----
had fishing rods and hunting rifles-------------they could reel in a five ounce
little wiggly thing-------and they could shoot a bear or a squirrel for lunch
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top