Nope, it says murder.
In some sources it says kill.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Nope, it says murder.
Uh, no. Ted Bundy knew exactly what he was doing when he killed those women. If the State executes someone it thinks has killed unlawfully but actually hasn't, then that was an accident.Such feeble logic. All killing sprees could be relegate to 'accident' under such logic.
This is why we have State Law...And if killer executes people that killer views as violating (literally anything) it is not a killing spree. It's just punishment, not killing.
If you say so.In some sources it says kill.
Would we be having this conversation if I didn't think a Jew who was witnessed to have transgressed the Sabbath should be killed?Well, I might have missed that.
Well, Saturday would be the right day of the week to get a stoning, not the wrong day. But yeah that's the Law.So, it was righteous to kill a man (by stoning) for collecting branches on the wrong day of the week. (Viole taking notes about the concept of righteousness).
Righteousness by the context you are discussing refers to "judging in a Jewish court a person who had transgressed the Sabbath to stoning". The Law doesn't change, so were we permitted to execute capital punishment, and were the witnesses capable of giving accepted testimony in front of the court, it would be righteous for the twenty three judges to judge the person to stoning.Do you think it would still be righteous today, or does rightheousness depend on circumstances?
I answered that here for you.By the way, what are those other three execution methods?
Ciao
- viole
The question is, what was going on in the man's heart, to want to disobey a clear command of God in the first place?Numbers 15
32 Now while the children of Israel were in the wilderness, they found a man gathering sticks on the Sabbath day.33 And those who found him gathering sticks brought him to Moses and Aaron, and to all the congregation. 34 They put him under guard, because it had not been explained what should be done to him.
35 Then the Lord said to Moses, “The man must surely be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him with stones outside the camp.” 36 So, as the Lord commanded Moses, all the congregation brought him outside the camp and stoned him with stones, and he died.
I can't get over how psychotic it is to kill someone for working on the wrong day of the week! It's just crazy! Could someone offer me the correct context.
Why is "do not kill" and overriding commandment? I'm just wondering.With the overriding commandment of "do not kill," I see no difference. But I do see the inconsistency, and how that could lead to justification for killing spree.
Uh, no. Ted Bundy knew exactly what he was doing when he killed those women.
If the State executes someone it thinks has killed unlawfully but actually hasn't, then that was an accident.
Exodus - Chapter 20 (Parshah Yitro)
I give up. Have a nice day.You don't know this. Ted Bundy knew exactly what he was doing in the same way a State knows exactly what it is doing when it kills a convicted criminal (who is actually innocent).
And this accident, happens to be murder. It's either murder or Capital punishment. Both are killing. To excuse it as mere accident actually makes killing sprees much easier to justify, under such feeble logic.
It's more that the commandment of "Thou shalt not kill" really needs to have a disclaimer on it, saying that "Thou shalt not kill, except when a person does a through z actions."Why is "do not kill" and overriding commandment? I'm just wondering.
In Hebrew it says "murder" (from the root RṢḤ). Its distinct from killing (from the root HRG). And the difference, as you basically said, is killing someone who G-d did say should be judged for death is unlawful and by extension - murder. While killing someone who G-d did say should be judged for death is lawful and not murder.It also says (in some sources) you shall not kill. The idea that we have two words, with same result, but different intent, means we get to play god on matters of life and death. Murder being "unlawful" but then only some people, who may not be godly (even a little bit) get to decide which of their killings are lawful and which aren't. Such that abortion is not murder, since it is 'lawful.'
I don't know. I mean, in the US, does the law against homicide come with a disclaimer in the 30 states where its legal?It's more that the commandment of "Thou shalt not kill" really needs to have a disclaimer on it, saying that "Thou shalt not kill, except when a person does a through z actions."
Why is "do not kill" and overriding commandment? I'm just wondering.
Exodus - Chapter 20 (Parshah Yitro)
"You shall not murder."
Christian translations also think there is an 'order of Melchizedek", so...
I give up. Have a nice day.
Talmud, Yoma 28b.
Right. So?
I'm guessing at some point over the years that he was in Egypt as a child and young adult. By the time he killed the Egyptian, he was already experienced in some form of prophetic vision. His sister was a prophetess from a young age and his father was the leader of the generation. He seemed to be allowed out of the palace and knew that he was an Israelite as well. So it seems the most likely possibility. Although I guess its also possible he had studied under Bithiah. I don't really know.
No it doesn't. In case you hadn't realized, the context is the Torah, that is - the Book of Law. It already comes with parameters for what constitutes justifiable killing.Because it opens the door to all sorts of interpretations for what makes for justifiable killing. Therefore, whoa to those that seek to override it with feeble logic.
Clearly though, He decided to hand that off to the people downstairs.The commandment - thou shall not work on the Sabbath can also be overcome with feeble logic, but is likely (and by that I mean certainly) not harming anyone other than sense of God, which I'm thinking God alone can take care of.
Watching a person isn't called work by Jewish standards.Would be interesting to consider all the things that might constitute work, such that the person noticing the other person picking up sticks, was arguably 'working' that day as well.
In Hebrew it says "murder" (from the root RṢḤ). Its distinct from killing (from the root HRG). And the difference, as you basically said, is killing someone who G-d did say should be judged for death is unlawful and by extension - murder. While killing someone who G-d did say should be judged for death is lawful and not murder.
Watching a person isn't called work by Jewish standards.