Stoning people to death

[cacheman]

On another thread, a poster said: 

"Polygamy and stoning, for example, are not inherently unethical (even though they are sometimes unethical) because the are sometimes condoned by God."

This made me wonder if people believe that God actually commanded people to throw rocks at other people until they were dead for certain infractions.  I went to LDS.org and used the search term 'stoning' to see what came up.  I didn't find anything suggesting that this divine command was a translation error or any kind of human error.  Apparently,  even Dallin Oaks believes that God commanded people to be killed by stoning for using the Lord's name in vain through profanity.  https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/04/reverent-and-clean?lang=eng 

Is it commonly accepted that this command was not only divinely sanctioned,  but also ethical under those circumstances?  If so,  was Jehovah the one commanding this?  Just curious about people's thoughts on this. 

-cacheman

 

Edited November 24, 2017 by cacheman

[The Nehor]

Few things are as entertaining as a good stoning.

 

[thesometimesaint]

People have been blaming their actions on their God for a long time now.

[The Nehor]

1 minute ago, thesometimesaint said:

People have been blaming their actions on their God for a long time now.

Stone him!!!!

Oh wait, did we just decide that was bad?

In that case:

Burn him!!!!!

[cacheman]

6 minutes ago, thesometimesaint said:

People have been blaming their actions on their God for a long time now.

That's what I think as well.  I imagine that many other LDS would also disagree on this issue with Dallin Oaks and the board member I quoted.  

Edited November 24, 2017 by cacheman

[rpn]

It would be less consistent with agency to instruct in the method of carrying out His commandments.   If you look at all the commandments through out all the scriptures, it isn't very often that He outlines the specific way to do it, and there is some condemnation of how some chose to live them and impose them on others. (referring to Pharisees).

[strappinglad]

If we all had to kill the turkey before dinner , we might (might) think harder before doing it. Stoning was a community effort. There was no hiding from the responsibility.

[Storm Rider]

So, how many thousands of years ago was this directive supposed to given by God?  At best, your comments are overwhelmingly an example of recentism. It smacks of smug, moral elitism.

What resources were available at that time to kill someone or what was common?  I guess everyone could have sliced and diced the target with swords, but not everyone had one.  Stoning was clearly the easiest, most widely available method of public execution where the community is left to understand what is and what is not acceptable behavior in the community.

Do I think God commanded it? Yes

[cacheman]

28 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

So, how many thousands of years ago was this directive supposed to given by God?  At best, your comments are overwhelmingly an example of recentism. It smacks of smug, moral elitism.

What resources were available at that time to kill someone or what was common?  I guess everyone could have sliced and diced the target with swords, but not everyone had one.  Stoning was clearly the easiest, most widely available method of public execution where the community is left to understand what is and what is not acceptable behavior in the community.

Do I think God commanded it? Yes

I don't mean to sound smug and elitist.  I'm just trying to get a feel for how people today interpret these scriptures.  I appreciate your willingness to comment.

However, some of the infractions deemed worthy of death by stoning seem petty to me.  I assume that you don't condone the modern practice of stoning.  I wonder if the modern practitioners of stoning, view people like us as smug,  moral elitists. 

Edited November 24, 2017 by cacheman

[cacheman]

24 minutes ago, strappinglad said:

If we all had to kill the turkey before dinner , we might (might) think harder before doing it. Stoning was a community effort. There was no hiding from the responsibility.

So you believe that the command was a deterrent in that the community had to grapple with the seriousness of the penalty before deciding on enforcement?  I want to male sure I understand you. 

[cacheman]

31 minutes ago, rpn said:

It would be less consistent with agency to instruct in the method of carrying out His commandments.   If you look at all the commandments through out all the scriptures, it isn't very often that He outlines the specific way to do it, and there is some condemnation of how some chose to live them and impose them on others. (referring to Pharisees).

If I'm reading you correctly...you feel that the specific means of punishment for the various 'sins' was not divinely mandated.  Do you believe that these passages were incorrectly translated,  or corrupted over time? 

[Duncan]

Wasn't Stephen stoned in Acts 7? I am sure they were more than a few who were that probably didn't care what God thought about it. If God commanded it, then that's his business and the stonee's. I am much more concerned as to why the Munsters TV show got cancelled

[thesometimesaint]

I'll let God do his own dirty work. If He/She/It wants me dead I'm pretty sure He/She/It knows how to do it.

[Jeanne]

Correct or not...why wouldn't the Lord say....don't stone people!

[thesometimesaint]

1 minute ago, Jeanne said:

Correct or not...why wouldn't the Lord say....don't stone people!

It is a mixed bag. Some places in the Scriptures it is Thou shalt not kill, in others it is thou shalt utterly destroy.

[Robert F. Smith]

Those who live in a strict Muslim country, such as Saudia, can see public executions (firing squad, beheadings) and other punishments -- a thief's hand can be cut off just outside the Mosque after Friday morning prayers.  Even in relatively modern times, in Greece, communal executions by stoning or slitting the throat were quite common -- one such is portrayed in "Zorba the Greek."  Does God order such actions?  Or have men attributed their customs to God?

[Rain]

Sometimes when I read the Old Testament I have a hard time reconciling the view of God with my view of Him. I cannot believe that God would punish a man that treated his wife so badly that she left him, by making him have his wife back again. It makes no logical sense. I don't remember where that is. I have to think some of things are in the Bible wrongly as well, but I don't know how they got there. 

Stoning is one thing that I lean in being put in the Bible wrongly. I keep an open mind that maybe I am missing something, but at this point it would not be something I could say is ever ok without further light on the matter. 

[Duncan]

Always remember that the Bible is legit as far as it's translated correctly. So, when weird things come up I just say well there's this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosco_the_dog

 

People do odd things sometimes

[HappyJackWagon]

3 hours ago, Storm Rider said:

So, how many thousands of years ago was this directive supposed to given by God?  At best, your comments are overwhelmingly an example of recentism. It smacks of smug, moral elitism.

What resources were available at that time to kill someone or what was common?  I guess everyone could have sliced and diced the target with swords, but not everyone had one.  Stoning was clearly the easiest, most widely available method of public execution where the community is left to understand what is and what is not acceptable behavior in the community.

Do I think God commanded it? Yes

It's hard not to be smug and elitist when we have so many better ways of killing people nowadays. I feel so thankful for guns and vehicles and so many weapons of mass murder that are so much more efficient than bludgeoning someone with stones.

While it may be controversial, I'm proud of my bumper sticker-  Stoning: I'm against it!

[Darren10]

9 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It's hard not to be smug and elitist when we have so many better ways of killing people nowadays. I feel so thankful for guns and vehicles and so many weapons of mass murder that are so much more efficient than bludgeoning someone with stones.

While it may be controversial, I'm proud of my bumper sticker-  Stoning: I'm against it!

"I'm against it!" - Good to know you're anti drug use.

[Darren10]

I take the biblical stoning as part of God's commandment / will. There's no reason beyond our modetn-day despise for such a thing and for things such as blasphemy. So long as it was God's will, it was the right thing to do. But this Don't think is the most controversial position I have. I also think the times where the Bible speaks of killing everyone, I take that as literal and as the will of God (Jehovah/ Jesus Christ). While not killing entire peoples, LDS scripture has done support for this. Nephi killed Kagan according to God's will and Jehovah Himself killed Abraham's would be killer. 

[3DOP]

7 hours ago, cacheman said:

On another thread, a poster said: 

"Polygamy and stoning, for example, are not inherently unethical (even though they are sometimes unethical) because the are sometimes condoned by God."

This made me wonder if people believe that God actually commanded people to throw rocks at other people until they were dead for certain infractions.  I went to LDS.org and used the search term 'stoning' to see what came up.  I didn't find anything suggesting that this divine command was a translation error or any kind of human error.  Apparently,  even Dallin Oaks believes that God commanded people to be killed by stoning for using the Lord's name in vain through profanity.  https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/04/reverent-and-clean?lang=eng 

Is it commonly accepted that this command was not only divinely sanctioned,  but also ethical under those circumstances?  If so,  was Jehovah the one commanding this?  Just curious about people's thoughts on this. 

-cacheman

 

I am not sure if you are questioning the idea that people could believe God actually commanded capital punishment, or if it is the method of capital punishment that you find disturbing. If it is the method, it should be remembered that stones were used as weapons. David took five stones with him, but only needed one to slay the giant. I think those of us who might believe that God commanded capital punishment in the days before gun powder might be inclined to perceive stoning in that day, as one would think of a firing squad in our day. The Scriptures speak of Israelites whose skills were highly developed in this area: 

"And there were found of Benjamin five and twenty thousand men that drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gabaa,  Who were seven hundred most valiant fighting men, fighting with the left hand as well as the right; and slinging stones so sure that they could even hit a hair, and not miss by the stone's going on either side." (Judges 20, 15, 16)

It would be a somber occasion. The perpetrator of the crime against Israel would be brought out of the city, or in Moses' era, the camp. It is possible that it was a wild angry mob including women and children throwing whatever they could lay their hands upon, while the condemned rolls into a ball while the action goes on for many minutes or even hours. It seems like it would take too long that way, even requiring breaks for the weary stoners. I tend to think it would have been necessarily swifter and more ceremonious than that. If the condemned was bound to a stake, in front of those who had skills with stones, it would seem that like Goliath, death could possibly come as instantly as it did for Goliath.

              

       

Edited November 25, 2017 by 3DOP

[Coop]

4 hours ago, cacheman said:

On another thread, a poster said: 

"Polygamy and stoning, for example, are not inherently unethical (even though they are sometimes unethical) because the are sometimes condoned by God."

This made me wonder if people believe that God actually commanded people to throw rocks at other people until they were dead for certain infractions.  I went to LDS.org and used the search term 'stoning' to see what came up.  I didn't find anything suggesting that this divine command was a translation error or any kind of human error.  Apparently,  even Dallin Oaks believes that God commanded people to be killed by stoning for using the Lord's name in vain through profanity.  https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1986/04/reverent-and-clean?lang=eng 

Is it commonly accepted that this command was not only divinely sanctioned,  but also ethical under those circumstances?  If so,  was Jehovah the one commanding this?  Just curious about people's thoughts on this. 

-cacheman

 

This is a good question.  Here is how I make sense of stoning as a form of justice that is both effective and merciful based on the following assumptions.

First if we assume that stoning was a real time process and not the consequence of a formal justice system then stoning was probably just a very physical method of shunning someone.  And anyone who was driven from one city was able to go to the various sanctuary cities.  Life was probably not that great for an exile but it would be better than being dead.

Second before any stoning can occur someone has to initiate the process.  And to do this they would need two things.  First they would need the help of others because doing this alone was risky.  If you throw a rock at someone they might throw it back.  And they might be stronger and more accurate than you.  Next getting help might not be that easy.  I know the last time I asked my neighbor to help me stone someone he turned me down.  In fact a lot of my neighbors did.  So I decided that it wasn't worth my time or life, and I dropped the whole thing.

Lastly I know if I had committed a serious crime and it carried the risk of being stoned I would be constantly on my guard looking to flee on a moments notice.  And as soon as I caught wind that someone was trying to round up enough people to stone me I would be gone.

When I consider stoning this way then it makes perfect sense.

 

[omni]

It's pretty incredible to see so many people defending the barbaric practice of stoning, even for sins as minor as blasphemy (yes, I consider blasphemy to be minor in comparison to murder or rape).

This one's pretty easy guys, doesn't it make more sense that this was a secular bronze-aged practice that got misinterpreted as coming from God?  Remember, the Bible is fallible, no reason to die on this hill. 

[cacheman]

59 minutes ago, 3DOP said:

I am not sure if you are questioning the idea that people could believe God actually commanded capital punishment, or if it is the method of capital punishment that you find disturbing. If it is the method, it should be remembered that stones were used as weapons. David took five stones with him, but only needed one to slay the giant. I think those of us who might believe that God commanded capital punishment in the days before gun powder might be inclined to perceive stoning in that day, as one would think of a firing squad in our day. The Scriptures speak of Israelites whose skills were highly developed in this area: 

And there were found of Benjamin five and twenty thousand men that drew the sword, besides the inhabitants of Gabaa,  Who were seven hundred most valiant fighting men, fighting with the left hand as well as the right; and slinging stones so sure that they could even hit a hair, and not miss by the stone's going on either side. (Judges 20, 15, 16)

It would be a somber occasion. The perpetrator of the crime against Israel would be brought out of the city, or in Moses' era, the camp. It is possible that it was a wild angry mob including women and children throwing whatever they could lay their hands upon, while the condemned rolls into a ball while the action goes on for many minutes or even hours. It seems like it would take too long that way, even requiring breaks for the weary stoners. I tend to think it would have been necessarily swifter and more ceremonious than that. If the condemned was bound to a stake, in front of those who had skills with stones, it would seem that like Goliath, death could possibly come as instantly as it did for Goliath.

              

       

I'm questioning both of the ideas you mentioned,  but particularly in the context of the types of infractions that were deemed worthy of this punishment. A death sentence by stoning could be brought about by talking the lord's name in vain or gathering wood on the sabbath,  among other petty things. 

In a ceremonial stoning,  you might be right that death could occur quickly.  But,  it often doesn't.  There are plenty of real life examples of that in recent times.  It's a horrific way to die.