mikado5001 Posted September 21, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 145 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 972 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/03/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/23/1973 Share Posted September 21, 2008 I found myself, this past week, haunted by this passage. Specifically the portion I bolded, italicized, and underlined. Here is what has been haunting me. As I go through the Old Testement I see that GOD gives exact instructions on just about EVERYTHING. To quote Tevye "....How to eat, how to sleep, how to work, even how to wear clothes." GOD tells Noah the precise measurements of the Ark, how many to take of each type, and even, as I heard in a sermon this week, to take clean animals for offerings of sacrifice to GOD. And the same for Moses, Aaron, the Ark of the Covenant, Garments, etc. So, when GOD tells Moses to have the people stone the Blasphemer, there is no mention of the removal of the hands that are placed on the Blasphemor. This brought to mind at once JESUS when HE said 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Now I am kind of certain that I am misreading this passage. But is there a reason why GOD does not say to remove the hands prior to stoning? I guess that the Israelites were not completly stupid. And that they were smart enough to say "Hey, if we keep our hands on this guys head. We're gonna get stoned to, right? Bottom line, for me, was GOD saying "Let he who is without sin..." without actually saying that? Like Isaiah 48:12-16. This was a WOAH moment for me. Because GOD has been VERY VERY precise on just about every situation concerning the law, and other issues. So it does seem somewhat unusual that GOD would not mention the removal of the hand before the stoning begins. A Blasphemer Stoned 10 Now the son of an Israelite mother and an Egyptian father went out among the Israelites, and a fight broke out in the camp between him and an Israelite. 11 The son of the Israelite woman blasphemed the Name with a curse; so they brought him to Moses. (His mother's name was Shelomith, the daughter of Dibri the Danite.) 12 They put him in custody until the will of the LORD should be made clear to them. 13 Then the LORD said to Moses: 14 "Take the blasphemer outside the camp. All those who heard him are to lay their hands on his head, and the entire assembly is to stone him. 15 Say to the Israelites: 'If anyone curses his God, he will be held responsible; 16 anyone who blasphemes the name of the LORD must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikado5001 Posted September 25, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 145 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 972 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/03/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/23/1973 Author Share Posted September 25, 2008 Does anyone have a thought on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted September 25, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,081 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 430 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted September 25, 2008 It was meant to be a public witness that the name of God had been blasphemed and thus legitimize the punishment. It also was to a way to signify to the offender that his blood was upon his own head, meaning his sin brought this punishment upon himself . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
psalmone Posted September 25, 2008 Group: Advanced Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 261 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/22/2008 Status: Offline Birthday: 03/15/1970 Share Posted September 25, 2008 This is strong but I agree with it, it would deter alot of occultic works that go on. There are cases when ppl are taunted even in the christian congregation by occutic persons and demons. That's too weak, they should fear to even dare. I remember when I used to approach christian meetings with Godly-fear because of the brokeness that alone could survive such a service. Nowadays I hear demonic activity among some congregations and I'm wondering what to do about it. There are people who treat christians like sport, even daring to venture into thier Godly devotion and worship and they should fear. We shouldn't have to heighten security for what they ought to know from simply the Godly witness in our environment and in the Spirit as well as what they should know as common decency for those yet to believe. I suppose the answer is that we keep on preaching the wisdom of God and the life of God until our communities and our world are irrecoverably influenced and we need not fear because the only wise God is the only safety. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikado5001 Posted September 26, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 145 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 972 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/03/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/23/1973 Author Share Posted September 26, 2008 I see both your points. Especially about the blood on the blasphemers head. But I still cannot shake the fact that GOD did not say remove the hands. Am I seeing JESUS where HE is not in the Old Testament? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlindSeeker Posted September 26, 2008 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 69 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 4,081 Content Per Day: 0.53 Reputation: 430 Days Won: 5 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted September 26, 2008 I see both your points. Especially about the blood on the blasphemers head. But I still cannot shake the fact that GOD did not say remove the hands. Am I seeing JESUS where HE is not in the Old Testament? Perhaps it would help to see your perspective . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikado5001 Posted September 29, 2008 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 2 Topic Count: 145 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 972 Content Per Day: 0.14 Reputation: 3 Days Won: 0 Joined: 07/03/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/23/1973 Author Share Posted September 29, 2008 I see both your points. Especially about the blood on the blasphemers head. But I still cannot shake the fact that GOD did not say remove the hands. Am I seeing JESUS where HE is not in the Old Testament? Perhaps it would help to see your perspective . . . . It's like this BlindSeeker. When GOD was giving out directions for so many things in the Old Testament. Those instructions were precise. Build the Ark so high and so wide. Build the Temple, Gates, Tables, The Ark for the Tablets, and the Holy of Holies. The health rituals for all unclean people, animal sacrifices, washing of Priests, and so forth. I read about the stoning instructions after hearing a sermon on Noah and the Ark. In the New Testament Jesus says "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I found it strange that GOD, who gave such precise instructions, would leave out the removal of the hands from the head of the blasphemer. Perhaps HE was telling the Israelites not to stone the blasphemer. Since those who had put hands on the person. They would also be stoned to. An act of forgivness and love, perhaps? Again I confess that I may be wrong. But "Let he who is without sin..." leaped right into my head. This whole theory is mainly based on a wonderfully uplifting passage I read in a Bible in one year plan. "Jesus is on every page of the Old Testament. If you don't see HIM, read the page again." And I remember a Pastor telling me "The Old Testament is the New Testament CONCEALED. And the New Testament is the Old Testament REVEALED." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ParanoidAndroid Posted September 30, 2008 Group: Senior Member Followers: 1 Topic Count: 39 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 591 Content Per Day: 0.09 Reputation: 14 Days Won: 0 Joined: 04/01/2007 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/27/1979 Share Posted September 30, 2008 It's an interesting theory. Certainly a pause for thought. The passage does give the impression that the people who accused them are to be stoned together. But pointing it to Jesus' "he who is without sin cast the first stone" speech suffers one fatal flaw! The passage is not in the original text of John. It is universally accepted to be a later insertion by over-zealous scribes. While the actual text itself does complement the type of thing Jesus would have taught (forgiveness, rather than condemnation), this specific event and comment (he who is without sin...) likely never happened - at the least, we have no biblical evidence to prove it apart from scribes editing it in long after the original author passed away. The themes you raise are interesting, but no direct New Testament correlation can be found in this particular instance. All the best, ~ PA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts