continuation.....
- Don Tan To throw the first stone you need to be a witness. Yeshua was not present when the adulterous crime was committed.
Per divorce HaShem made it quite clear how he views it...
16If you hate [her], send [her] away, says the Lord God of Israel. For injustice shall cover his garment, said the Lord of Hosts, but you shall beware of your spirit, and do not deal treacherously. טזכִּי שָׂנֵא שַׁלַּח אָמַר יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְכִסָּה חָמָס עַל לְבוּשׁוֹ אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת וְנִשְׁמַרְתֶּם בְּרוּחֲכֶם וְלֹא תִבְגֹּדוּ: Malachi 2 - MB Are you sure the person (himself) needed to be the witness in order to throw stone?
Before stoning, they must went throught Shanderin court that time. Even jesus was a witness, he had no right to throw stone because they need the legal court process.
Shandarin court was not in power at that time (during the time of jesus) due to Rome.
So, not to throw stone or to throw stone has nothing to do with witnessess because that was suppose to be done by the court. He has no right to decide. Plus, if not mistaken --the new testament never mentioned jesus himself intended to throw stone, he in fact questioned the olders who stand there. - Don Tan Are you making an inference or an empirical statement ?
It may seem logical to infer something. However, if you read the text without adding, removing, or drawing, additional conclusions. It doesn't say they went through a Shanderin court. If you read the text directly, it explicitly states they caught her in the act, and dragged her to the Rabbi Yeshua to see what he would do...... court or no court.... - MB This is the New Testament, a book that cannot be trusted and imcomplete with full error. Do you know there was Jewish court (Shanderin by that time) that time? Before the Rome was so powerful the Jewish court was in effective for Jewish law. After the Rome in power, the Shanderin gone.
(*Logical sense, without Jewish court and law -- how do they intepreted laws out without them? Impossible. Even without historical knowledge to know shanderin existed, the common sense would tells us.)
The one that REMOVING this fact is the new testament. Read the history and is in there. The NT never mentioned Jewish court -- that is the loop hole for NT and CHristianity. - MB In addition, when they dragged to jesus they (the olders) were ("purposefully") tested him (jesus) and jesus response to them that who was righteous will be the one who can throw stone.
jesus himself was a "righteous" and he never throw a stone and Christianity took this opportunity to point out that the law were done away. In truth, jesus knew that this has to pass throguht the shanderin court.
They were proper rules and regulations in Shanderin court to decide and will eventually void the case because no one can murder another, only G-d can take away a life of a person. They will take the laws to void it.
(Note: That is why Israel has no death penalty today because when you intepreted the laws up to the highest level, death penalty is illegal -- in conventional speaking. However, killing is not illegal, murdering is. When a person repent during the trial, he turn back to G-d, and if that court sentence him to death after he repented, that court is in trouble and that is consider murder.)
Unfortunately, today Christians knowledge mistook this. And unfortunately, today Muslim knowledge blindly copy the old testament and run it.
Don Tan In this instance, could one prove empirically, that the Shanderin court was used ? YES or NO ? It's not a trick question.
I accept the New Testament by faith. Just as i accept the Old Testament by faith, and as i said, before receiving confirmation myself..
By the way, Muslims say both the Old and New Testament's are distorted. They themselves, cannot provide an empirical undistorted
text, accept for ramblings from a desert dweller that poached writings from all over, and wrote it in a poetic form. Hence, claimed that there isn't a book like the one he dictated....
I accept the New Testament by faith. Just as i accept the Old Testament by faith, and as i said, before receiving confirmation myself..
By the way, Muslims say both the Old and New Testament's are distorted. They themselves, cannot provide an empirical undistorted
text, accept for ramblings from a desert dweller that poached writings from all over, and wrote it in a poetic form. Hence, claimed that there isn't a book like the one he dictated....
No comments:
Post a Comment