The Most Publicized Honour Killing in History.

[amrchaos]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

That was not an honor killing!!

If it was an honor Killing, Mary would have to order Jesus dead for some offense--since Mary is the only one who could be dishonored by Jesus....understand?

Unless you are saying Jesus dishonored GOD, then the Jews are only acting according to gods will. But that would imply Christianity is false and the Jews acted righteously when they condemned Jesus. You don't mean that, do you?

 

[irosie91]

Actually, the premise this thread is based on is faulty because it wasn't an honor killing.

The woman was caught breaking Jewish Law and thus was a criminal.

And was to be punished according to the law of the land for her crime. ..

And what Jewish law did she break, Sunni?

Adultery.

And there were no civil jewish courts mentioned in those gospels, either.

She was condemned by the religious authorities for a sin and her punishment was death by stoning.

*********************************

I feel like I am listening to conversation in a bar room in appalachia

and with the endorsement of a "lawyer" and self proclaimed "bible schoolar"
no less

*******************************


In judea of that time there were COURTS anybody who ever studied law
would know that one of the absolute requirements of jewish societies dating
back THOUSANDS of years-----were "courts--with judges" not having a
court and a judge was considered as barbaric as worshipping idols for
jews-----way back there were COURTS in Mesopotamia too. ---
"two thousand years ago" is relatively modern history---we do know what
was going on. One thing that was going on is no one was being
executed for adultery------another thing was only the sanhedrin in
Jerusalem could impose a death sentence. ----not little local courts---
although there were little local courts for other issues

as to 2000 years ago----the talmudic era PARABLEs abounded ---
the mishnah is CHOCK FULL OF THEM -----and people quoted them
incessantly

its a parable jerks-----its not history

when you think sanhedrin----think SUPREME COURT

Jesus was brought to trial at the sanhedrin on sothing
like a charge of BLASPHEMY---- the only way to execute a
person for "BLASPHEMY" back then would be if he led
something like an INSURRECTION ------just saying
he did not believe or violating some ritual was not a
reason for execution----he would have to have led lots
of people into something considered really bad---like
debauchery--or child sacrifice or have opened
a tatoo parlor-------on a large scale... The sanhedrin refused
to convict even though at that timie---the SANHEDRIN
was infiltrated by roman shills. --sadducees ----
even as roman shills they had to adhere somewhat to
jewish law -----Jesus had simply not done anything
EXECUTABLE in jewish law So the romans did it
themselves If all the pharisees were out to get
Jesus-------as some idiots claim------they could have
done it on the high road ------an assassination -----
the country was VERY MUCH in political and sectarian
turmoil
.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

Dinah

This article is about the Biblical character. For other uses, see*Dinah (disambiguation).In the*Hebrew Bible,*Dinah*(Hebrew:*דִּינָה,Modern*Dina*Tiberian*Dînā*; "Judged; vindicated") was the daughter of*Jacob, one of the*patriarchsof the*Israelites, and*Leah, his first wife. The episode of her abduction and violation by aCanaanite*prince, and the subsequent vengeance of her brothers*Simeon*and*Levi, commonly referred to as "The Rape of Dinah", is told inGenesis 34.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinah

 

[Roudy]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

Of course this "honor killing" never did occur, those who were holding the stones put them down because of what Jesus said, that is, even if you go by the assumption that the story is actually true.

Which means, even Jesus and his fellow Jews were more civilized THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, than Muslims are today.

Thanks.

 

[Roudy]

Why is Islam the only religion that murders their own daughters over their supposed honor when muslims claim it isn't part of Islam?

Islam doesn't honor kill women.

People with ingrained tribal and cultural mindsets engage in honor killing.

Just ask the Hindus, the worlds leaders in honor killings. ..

So what you're saying is not only is Islam a shitty religion, but so is the culture of those that practice it.

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

 

[SherriMunnerlyn]

 

[The Irish Ram]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

Can't argue with that. And notice that the other half of the "caught in the act" duo was conspicuously absent.
As with all cultures, rules apply. Yesterday and today. She knew the risk she was taking. But let's look at Jesus in that situation:

The pharisees were tempting Jesus to condemn her according to the Law, Him being a Rabbi and all. Jesus finally addressed them without circumventing the law, which was what they were after:

John 8:7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

After He shamed them all and they left without an accusation against Christ, Jesus did 2 things. Condemned her not, for her sin, because he sees hearts, not flesh.
And, because he would be paying for her sin shortly on the cross, he told her to go and live sin free, because he was about to fulfill the law for her. She left the situation, alive, under the grace of Christ.

John 12:47 And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.

Great guy, that Jesus.

 

[sealadaigh]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

Of course this "honor killing" never did occur, those who were holding the stones put them down because of what Jesus said, that is, even if you go by the assumption that the story is actually true.

Which means, even Jesus and his fellow Jews were more civilized THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, than Muslims are today.

Thanks.

LOL...well, the jews who listened to jaysus H perhaps were.

i dunno about the others, they all seemed like a bloodthirsty lot to me, killin' all those first born puppies and peeps and still celebratin' that bloodbath to this very day.

thanks.

 

[Roudy]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

Of course this "honor killing" never did occur, those who were holding the stones put them down because of what Jesus said, that is, even if you go by the assumption that the story is actually true.

Which means, even Jesus and his fellow Jews were more civilized THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, than Muslims are today.

Thanks.

LOL...well, the jews who listened to jaysus H perhaps were.

i dunno about the others, they all seemed like a bloodthirsty lot to me, killin' all those first born puppies and peeps and still celebratin' that bloodbath to this very day.

thanks.

Do you ever go more than one post without saying something anti Semetic in the next one? LOL. What a freak.

 

[The Irish Ram]

"let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

jesus.

Of course this "honor killing" never did occur, those who were holding the stones put them down because of what Jesus said, that is, even if you go by the assumption that the story is actually true.

Which means, even Jesus and his fellow Jews were more civilized THOUSANDS OF YEARS AGO, than Muslims are today.

Thanks.

LOL...well, the jews who listened to jaysus H perhaps were.

i dunno about the others, they all seemed like a bloodthirsty lot to me, killin' all those first born puppies and peeps and still celebratin' that bloodbath to this very day.

thanks.

They didn't kill anybody. Pharaoh's refusal to let God's children go, was responsible for the cause and effect plaques that hit Egypt. The Jews just packed up and beat feet.
What they celebrate is the fact that God ended their captivity.

Prior to that, There were whole tribes that God told the Jews to wipe out, animals and all, in battle, and there were those that weren't, and the reason is nephilim, cross bred humans and animals with demonic spirits. When David fought Goliath, he picked up more than one stone to fling, because (nephilim) Goliath had brothers.

Our own native American Indians had contact with nephilim, and would hold up their hands to strangers to show the amount of digits on their hands. Nephilim often had extra digits.

And, sorry, but as long as this country allows it to "rain dead fetuses" in bloody abortion clinics, let's not feign outrage over dead puppies.

 

[emilynghiem]

Jesus was crucified by the Romans. Romans used the method of crucifixion. Not the Jews. So what is your point, Seal?

Why is Islam the only religion that murders their own daughters over their supposed honor when muslims claim it isn't part of Islam?

Dear Jeremiah: When I asked my Muslim friend at work about honor killings, based on a case I read where parents killed their daughter, the first words out of his mouth was: Was this in Pakistan? Or was the family Pakistani?

And the answer was yes.

Even though it is illegal in those countries, there are still some people who will take an outdated tradition and use it anyway, like in India where widows used to be burned on the funeral pyres of their husbands.

J, there are as many cases in America where one spouse, usually the man, will kill either the wife or the lover for committing adultery. This is against the law to murder, and also
against the Bible. But such people will carry out the belief that adultery is punishable by death and act this out literally.

The difference is whether people have a respect for government as the civil authority, and not take justice into their own hands.

So what goes wrong with either case, is where people fail to submit jurisdiction to civil authority.

The Christians in this country tend to respect this by how Christianity [in terms of respecting govt and civil authority] and also Constitutional laws are taught [as in due process through the civil procedures].

The Muslims I know who respect civil authority, do it either out of the same faith that Christians do when following the Bible as part of the laws the Muslims are supposed to be following as sent by God, or they do so out of respect for Constitutional principles in this country, or they do so out of respect for Mohammad's teachings on democratic principles, on peaceful coexistence, or on not imposing compulsion in religion.

Why not enforce all these sources that agree that the civil laws of democratic due process
are to be respected?

Because of the ability to abuse either the Bible, Islam or any other religion,
it seems it would be even more necessary and helpful to teach respect for
Constitutional principles as a requirement to protect religious freedom from abuse.
that way, if there is misteaching of any such religion, it can be corrected instead
of blaming or rejecting that whole religion because of the faults in interpreting or practicing it.

Don't you think correcting what is wrong with any case of religious abuse is better
than arguing endlessly over which religion is better or worse than others? Which approach is going to help more people in more cases to solve problems and correct abuses?