Is Stoning Immoral?

[Rose]

The topic I would like to explore in this article is the biblical method of capital punishment by stoning. In the Old Testament and into the New the method of punishment for a crime decreed worthy of death by Yahweh was stoning… this method was never condemned by Jesus. The first point I want to raise about stoning is one of causing people excessive suffering, when there are more humane ways of carrying out a punishment. The method of stoning a person to death is an extremely painful and slow process of death, yet this was the decreed method given by Yahweh…a good example in the New Testament is the stoning of Stephen carried out by the Jews. Why would Yahweh wish to submit people to such a gruesome method of death when there were much more humane ways of dealing with a capital crime, like the sword for example? So, the question must be asked, is it immoral to kill a person in a tortuous, barbaric manner for purposes of punishment when other methods would be more humane? Do we today consider it immoral and uncivilized to stone people to death as is spoken of in the Bible (and is still done in Muslim countries)? Of course we do! So, if it’s not acceptable now, why is it acceptable in the Bible?

Secondly, the crimes that were considered capital offenses by Yahweh worthy of stoning were things like picking up sticks on the Sabbath and adultery. Can you imagine stoning someone for picking up sticks, or adultery, what kind of a god would decree a punishment like that? Not a loving god that’s for sure. Imagine stoning your child for picking up a toy that you told him not to!

In the New Testament we see Jesus intervening in the case of "stoning of the women caught in adultery," which according to the laws of Yahweh was perfectly legitimate. So, did Jesus consider stoning to be an immoral act? It appears that he did not approve of it or else he would not have prevented it from happening by saying 'he that is without sin cast the first stone,' and 'go and sin no more'. So was Jesus going against the laws of his father, Yahweh? It appears so. According to the laws Yahweh gave in the Torah, if a person was caught in adultery the punishment was death by stoning and it matters not whether the people throwing the stones were sinful because they were carrying out Yahweh’s decree.

It’s time to speak out about the things the Bible contains that are immoral, and if those acts of immorality fall at the feet of Yahweh, so be it. Stoning a person is immoral, and wrong for any reason!

Rose

[duxrow]

:sFi_machinegunsdual
Jesus is not only the Rock which gave forth water, oil, honey, and fire, in the OT, but is also the STONE the builder's rejected (Hebrews didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah). So it's Jesus whom we should be throwing at sinners and non-believers.

The foolishness of God, 1Cor1:25, seems to be keeping many from seeing the Truth wrapped up in Holiness costume. And BTW, the Palestinians are still at it today--throwing real stones at the tanks, and even denting some of them! :yo:

[CWH]

The topic I would like to explore in this article is the biblical method of capital punishment by stoning. In the Old Testament and into the New the method of punishment for a crime decreed worthy of death by Yahweh was stoning… this method was never condemned by Jesus. The first point I want to raise about stoning is one of causing people excessive suffering, when there are more humane ways of carrying out a punishment. The method of stoning a person to death is an extremely painful and slow process of death, yet this was the decreed method given by Yahweh…a good example in the New Testament is the stoning of Stephen carried out by the Jews. Why would Yahweh wish to submit people to such a gruesome method of death when there were much more humane ways of dealing with a capital crime, like the sword for example? So, the question must be asked, is it immoral to kill a person in a tortuous, barbaric manner for purposes of punishment when other methods would be more humane? Do we today consider it immoral and uncivilized to stone people to death as is spoken of in the Bible (and is still done in Muslim countries)? Of course we do! So, if it’s not acceptable now, why is it acceptable in the Bible?

Secondly, the crimes that were considered capital offenses by Yahweh worthy of stoning were things like picking up sticks on the Sabbath and adultery. Can you imagine stoning someone for picking up sticks, or adultery, what kind of a god would decree a punishment like that? Not a loving god that’s for sure. Imagine stoning your child for picking up a toy that you told him not to!

In the New Testament we see Jesus intervening in the case of "stoning of the women caught in adultery," which according to the laws of Yahweh was perfectly legitimate. So, did Jesus consider stoning to be an immoral act? It appears that he did not approve of it or else he would not have prevented it from happening by saying 'he that is without sin cast the first stone,' and 'go and sin no more'. So was Jesus going against the laws of his father, Yahweh? It appears so. According to the laws Yahweh gave in the Torah, if a person was caught in adultery the punishment was death by stoning and it matters not whether the people throwing the stones were sinful because they were carrying out Yahweh’s decree.

It’s time to speak out about the things the Bible contains that are immoral, and if those acts of immorality fall at the feet of Yahweh, so be it. Stoning a person is immoral, and wrong for any reason!

Rose

Another God bashing! Poor God, seems to be blamed for almost everything.

How about death for drug trafficking or possession? Is it moral, this law is obviously man-made. Yet people who made or sell cigarettes that killed millions of people goes unpunished. There are obviously many man-made laws not made by God that are seemingly "immoral" even though they may not carry a death sentence:
- punishment of constituitional rape even though it is consensual
- punishment of traffic offenses such as speeding or drunken driving etc.
- punishment for possession of guns without license even though it is for self protection
- punishment for nudity or sex in public or possessing pornographic materials
- punishment for illegal immigrant even if they mean no harm
The list can go on and on.....

You said that stoning is cruel because of slow agonizing death so are people stabbed/slashed by the sword or wounded by bullets for they also die a slow agonizing death due to infection or bleeding. What difference does it makes compare to stoning? What if the first stone thrown hit the head and knocked him/her unconscious so that he/she did not feel the slow agonizing pain but died subsequently from bleeding? How about those who suffers a slow agonizing death from cancer, stroke, chronic bronchitis, AIDS and other diseases, is God to blame?

If stoning is immoral then all things being equal, all capital punishment or punishment by violence or for small crimes is immoral!....why can't they just forgive without punishments? :D

Well, law is law and justice must be maintained whether death or violent punishments that seems cruel and unfair. And it is man who made those laws.


May God forgive them, they know not what they are doing. :pray:

[Rose]

:sFi_machinegunsdual
Jesus is not only the Rock which gave forth water, oil, honey, and fire, in the OT, but is also the STONE the builder's rejected (Hebrews didn't accept Jesus as the Messiah). So it's Jesus whom we should be throwing at sinners and non-believers.

The foolishness of God, 1Cor1:25, seems to be keeping many from seeing the Truth wrapped up in Holiness costume. And BTW, the Palestinians are still at it today--throwing real stones at the tanks, and even denting some of them! :yo:

Hi Duxrow

I'm not sure what throwing Jesus at sinners has to do with the question of whether stoning is immoral? :confused:

[Rose]

Another God bashing! Poor God, seems to be blamed for almost everything.

Well, if as you believe god created everything why shouldn't he be blamed, especially the decrees that came from him that are written in his book. Yahweh is the one who decreed the immoral act of stoning to be the form of capital punishment meted out...how barbaric is that!




You said that stoning is cruel because of slow agonizing death so are people stabbed/slashed by the sword or wounded by bullets for they also die a slow agonizing death due to infection or bleeding. What difference does it makes compare to stoning? What if the first stone thrown hit the head and knocked him/her unconscious so that he/she did not feel the slow agonizing pain but died subsequently from bleeding? How about those who suffers a slow agonizing death from cancer, stroke, chronic bronchitis, AIDS and other diseases, is God to blame?

If stoning is immoral then all things being equal, all capital punishment or punishment by violence or for small crimes is immoral!....why can't they just forgive without punishments? :D

Well, law is law and justice must be maintained whether death or violent punishments that seems cruel and unfair. And it is man who made those laws.


May God forgive them, they know not what they are doing. :pray:

I think forgiving people is great, but of course that does not mean people who commit crimes shouldn't be punished...I just don't believe in capital punishment, especially when it involves torturing people like stoning does. Capital punishment is bad for a number of reasons, two of which are: there is always the chance that an innocent life gets taken, and the person who is the executioner is asked to kill someone who did him no harm.

[highflyertoo]

Another God bashing! Poor God, seems to be blamed for almost everything.

How about death for drug trafficking or possession? Is it moral, this law is obviously man-made. Yet people who made or sell cigarettes that killed millions of people goes unpunished. There are obviously many man-made laws not made by God that are seemingly "immoral" even though they may not carry a death sentence:
- punishment of constituitional rape even though it is consensual
- punishment of traffic offenses such as speeding or drunken driving etc.
- punishment for possession of guns without license even though it is for self protection
- punishment for nudity or sex in public or possessing pornographic materials
- punishment for illegal immigrant even if they mean no harm
The list can go on and on.....

You said that stoning is cruel because of slow agonizing death so are people stabbed/slashed by the sword or wounded by bullets for they also die a slow agonizing death due to infection or bleeding. What difference does it makes compare to stoning? What if the first stone thrown hit the head and knocked him/her unconscious so that he/she did not feel the slow agonizing pain but died subsequently from bleeding? How about those who suffers a slow agonizing death from cancer, stroke, chronic bronchitis, AIDS and other diseases, is God to blame?

If stoning is immoral then all things being equal, all capital punishment or punishment by violence or for small crimes is immoral!....why can't they just forgive without punishments? :D

Well, law is law and justice must be maintained whether death or violent punishments that seems cruel and unfair. And it is man who made those laws.


May God forgive them, they know not what they are doing. :pray:

Why wasn't King David stoned to death if the Law is Impartial?

[duxrow]

:icon_hello:
Maybe there weren't any left-handed to do the job?

Among all this people there were seven hundred chosen men lefthanded; every one could sling stones at an hair breadth, and not miss. Judges 20:16

[CWH]

Why wasn't King David stoned to death if the Law is Impartial?

Do you want people to stone to death for committing adultery especially so when he repent? Will you forgive someone who have repented for committing adultery? David was punished in other ways such as the death of his child.

God Blessed.

[CWH]

[QUOTE=Rose;43794]Well, if as you believe god created everything why shouldn't he be blamed, especially the decrees that came from him that are written in his book. Yahweh is the one who decreed the immoral act of stoning to be the form of capital punishment meted out...how barbaric is that!
So is God to be blamed for the food you ate, the plants and animals that He created and the children that you born?
You have yet to answer if there is any difference between capital punishment by stoning and capital punishment by swording. Both leads to slow agonizing death.


I think forgiving people is great, but of course that does not mean people who commit crimes shouldn't be punished...I just don't believe in capital punishment, especially when it involves torturing people like stoning does. Capital punishment is bad for a number of reasons, two of which are: there is always the chance that an innocent life gets taken, and the person who is the executioner is asked to kill someone who did him no harm.
Yes, I agree that forgiving is great. Punishment is actually an act of forgiving. A parent punishes a child for being naughty is actually forgiving the child much sternly and warning him to learn not to do that naughty thing again. Capital punishment is no different except that the punishment is death in order to uphold justice for a heinous crime and it is up to God to forgive him if he repented.
To comment on your comment,"the person who is the executioner is asked to kill someone who did him no harm", so is a soldier asked to kill the enemy who did him no harm. The simple answer is it is his job.

God Bless those who forgive. :pray:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Why wasn't King David stoned to death if the Law is Impartial?
Do you want people to stone to death for committing adultery especially so when he repent? Will you forgive someone who have repented for committing adultery? David was punished in other ways such as the death of his child.

God Blessed.
The killing of David's innocent son was not the punishment prescribed by God's Law. So you didn't answer the question.

And beside that, God said that children should not be punished for the sins of their fathers. So God contradicted his own law twice!

I don't want to see anyone stoned to death. That is a primitive and brutal form of punishment that is totally immoral. It is a barbaric form of torture. And the really sick thing is that Christians have been criticizing Islamic Sharia Law for commanding the stoning of people, as if it weren't taught by God Himself in the Bible! Here's a video that shows how evil and wicked the practice really is:


http://youtu.be/wJR3keih6CQ

The fact that Christians say stoning proves Islam is evil shows how they have lost their minds to their religion. They can't see the same evil in the Bible because they have made themselves blind.

[Rose]

Stoning is not only immoral, but it is SICK, Sick, sick and any god that would command stoning as a form of capital punishment is obviously the invention of barbaric, primitive minds.

I am utterly astounded that Christians so easily overlook the fact that stoning is the preferred form of punishment in the Bible that is instituted by Yahweh.

I am at a loss for words that are strong enough to express my total condemnation and disdain of any religion that has within the pages of its sacred text the horrendous abomination of stoning! :eek:

Rose

[David M]

Stoning is not only immoral, but it is SICK, Sick, sick and any god that would command stoning as a form of capital punishment is obviously the invention of barbaric, primitive minds.

I am utterly astounded that Christians so easily overlook the fact that stoning is the preferred form of punishment in the Bible that is instituted by Yahweh.

I am at a loss for words that are strong enough to express my total condemnation and disdain of any religion that has within the pages of its sacred text the horrendous abomination of stoning! :eek:

Rose

Good morning Rose.

I have some questions for you.

Q1. Do you support the death penalty for some crimes?

Q2. What crimes do you think deserve the death penalty?

If you support the death penalty, would you;

Q3. administer the punishment upon criminals who under the law should be put to death?

Q4. personally kill the criminal punishable by death, whether that be by hanging, electric chair or the method of your choice? Note. You will be seen publicly to be the one performing the death penalty.

Q5. prefer anonymity? Note: Throwing stones gives anonymity, and is not a slow death but quick. You perceive it to be slow.

Q6. What other forms of capital punishment do you think were appropriate in those days given extremely limited resources?

Q7. Was crucifixion better or worse than stoning?

Q8. What other forms of capital punishment are practiced in the world today and are they any better than stoning?


I look forward to your answers.

David

[CWH]

[QUOTE=Richard Amiel McGough;43927]The killing of David's innocent son was not the punishment prescribed by God's Law. So you didn't answer the question.

And beside that, God said that children should not be punished for the sins of their fathers. So God contradicted his own law twice!
David M had already answered that question, there is no need for me to answer. But I would like to share an interesting article that explained that King David did not commit adultery or murder from the Jewish authority point of view. That also explained my conviction why the 32,000 virgin wives were released (divorced) so that they would not become widows and could remarry again:

http://www.betemunah.org/fathers.html

Excerpt:
Was King David committing adultery? The Tanakh says no.

Did King David commit murder? The Tanakh says no. How can this be?

The Sages record that King David required that all of his soldiers were required to give their wives a 'get', a divorce, before they went off to battle. This was done so that if the soldier failed to return from the battle, and his body was not found, then the wife would not become an 'aguna', a woman who could not remarry. If she was legally divorced, then she could remarry if her husband did not return after a reasonable amount of time.

Kethuboth 9b Everyone who goes out into the war of the House of David writes for his wife a deed of divorce[2], for it is written, And to thy brethren shalt thou bring greetings, and take their pledge[3]. What [is the meaning of], ‘and take their pledge’? R. Joseph learnt: Things which are pledged between him and her[4].

Therefore, we know that Uriyya had given his wife a 'get' and was legally divorced. Therefore, we know that King David did not commit adultery. We can know that King David did not commit adultery because the Torah proscribes that the one who commits adultery is to be stoned to death:........

Did King David lust, sexually, after Bathsheba? No! King David did NOT lust after Bathsheba. He had entirely conquered that evil inclination. The story makes it sound like Bathsheba was taking a bath on her roof without any covering. Nothing could be further from the truth. Bathsheba was coming out from the mikveh, the ritual baptism that women must immerse in, every month. As she exited the mikveh house, her exalted spiritual state attracted King David. He prophetically saw that he was to father Solomon with this women. That is why he took her..........

Did David cause the murder of Uriyya the Hittite? The Tanakh says no.

How can this be? To understand this part, we must look carefully at the text to understand what is going on:

2 Shmuel (Samuel) 11:8-9 And David said to Uriah, Go down to thy house, and wash thy feet. And Uriah departed out of the king's house, and there followed him a mess [of meat] from the king. But Uriah slept at the door of the king's house with all the servants of his lord, and went not down to his house.

Notice that Uriyya disobeyed a DIRECT ORDER of the King. So, King David gives him a second chance:

2 Shmuel (Samuel) 11:10-12 And when they had told David, saying, Uriah went not down unto his house, David said unto Uriah, Camest thou not from [thy] journey? why [then] didst thou not go down unto thine house? And Uriah said unto David, The ark, and Israel, and Judah, abide in tents; and my lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open fields; shall I then go into mine house, to eat and to drink, and to lie with my wife? [as] thou livest, and [as] thy soul liveth, I will not do this thing. And David said to Uriah, Tarry here to day also, and to morrow I will let thee depart. So Uriah abode in Jerusalem that day, and the morrow. And when David had called him, he did eat and drink before him; and he made him drunk: and at even he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his lord, but went not down to his house.

At this point King David has no choice. Uriah has disobeyed a direct order of the king. The penalty for this offense is death.

2 Shmuel (Samuel) 11:14-17 And it came to pass in the morning, that David wrote a letter to Joab, and sent [it] by the hand of Uriah. And he wrote in the letter, saying, Set ye Uriah in the forefront of the hottest battle, and retire ye from him, that he may be smitten, and die. And it came to pass, when Joab observed the city, that he assigned Uriah unto a place where he knew that valiant men [were]. And the men of the city went out, and fought with Joab: and there fell [some] of the people of the servants of David; and Uriah the Hittite died also.

King David knows that Uriah has an evil heart[5], never the less, one MUST obey the King no matter what. Not wishing to publicly shame Uriah, King David has him killed in battle in an honorable manner. Notice that Joab does not protest in the least. Joab knew that the order of the King, as the chief justice, must be obeyed.

Ok, so now we know that King David did NOT commit adultery with Bath-Sheba and that he did not cause Uriah to be murdered. What we need to know is: What was King David’s sin?

HaShem’s punishments are always just. To determine the sin, we should look at the punishment:

2 Shmuel (Samuel) 11:26 And when the wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband was dead, she mourned for her husband. And when the mourning was past, David sent and fetched her to his house, and she became his wife, and bare him a son. But the thing that David had done displeased HaShem. And HaShem sent Nathan unto David. And he came unto him, and said unto him, There were two men in one city; the one rich, and the other poor. The rich [man] had exceeding many flocks and herds: But the poor [man] had nothing, save one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and nourished up: and it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his own meat, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was unto him as a daughter. And there came a traveller unto the rich man, and he spared to take of his own flock and of his own herd, to dress for the wayfaring man that was come unto him; but took the poor man's lamb, and dressed it for the man that was come to him. And David's anger was greatly kindled against the man; and he said to Nathan, [As] HaShem liveth, the man that hath done this [thing] shall surely die: And he shall restore the lamb fourfold, because he did this thing, and because he had no pity.

King David was also the chief Hakham, the chief Judge. Nathan the prophet naturally came to the King for a judgment.

David, being a great Torah scholar and Sage, renders a judgment in keeping with Torah. HaShem agreed to this judgment, EXCEPT for the death penalty:

2 Shmuel (Samuel) 12:13 And David said unto Nathan, I have sinned against HaShem. And Nathan said unto David, HaShem also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.

The bottom line is this: HaShem has accused King David of stealing a ewe, a female sheep. The penalty is, therefore, in keeping with the sin:

Shemot (Exodus) 22:1 If a man shall steal an ox, or a sheep, and kill it, or sell it; he shall restore five oxen for an ox, and four sheep for a sheep.

Therefore, King David’s sin was: Theft of a sheep.


I don't want to see anyone stoned to death. That is a primitive and brutal form of punishment that is totally immoral. It is a barbaric form of torture. And the really sick thing is that Christians have been criticizing Islamic Sharia Law for commanding the stoning of people, as if it weren't taught by God Himself in the Bible! Here's a video that shows how evil and wicked the practice really is:

The fact that Christians say stoning proves Islam is evil shows how they have lost their minds to their religion. They can't see the same evil in the Bible because they have made themselves blind.
Even hanging is equally barbaric; stabbing is also barbaric, nailed to the cross was also barbaric. Stoning is less "barbaric" if a large stone is thrown on the head it will cause unconciousness and even instant death.


May God Bless us all.:pray:

[David M]

Hello Cheow

I have not visited the link, but from what you have copied by way of an extract I think this is men changing the law to suit themselves. This is the problem the Israelites had interpreting the law and that what made it become so cumbersome. This extract is doing what Jesus accused the Pharisees of, i.e. "teaching as doctrine the commandments of men"

David was very aware of his sin that was pointed out to him by Nathan. David said to God; "Against thee only have I sinned." David knew full well that he had sinned twice and was guilty of murder and adultery and should have been put to death. It was this confession and the overall intent to delight in his heart in the Law of God that was pleasing to God. This episode speaks volumes for the mercy God extends to us and anyone whose heart is right before God. We can all fall prey to our lusts and David's example could be no greater. There is no reason to doubt Uriah will be resurrected if his heart was right before God. We cannot judge anyone who has died and limit God's right to resurrect anyone he sees fit. He has the capability and anyone we think should be resurrected who died innocently for whatever reason, we can think will be resurrected. We cannot limit God's mercy and compassion just as we cannot limit his punishment on those who deserve it.

Thanks for your contributions.

David

[Twospirits]

David M wrote,

David was very aware of his sin that was pointed out to him by Nathan. David said to God; "Against thee only have I sinned." David knew full well that he had sinned twice and was guilty of murder and adultery and should have been put to death.

The Tanakh was written by uninspired men, and the scriptures contradict these men Cheow, as David rightly points out. Here are a few thoughts on this from a few articles I read up on.

But first, It is imperative to note here that a vital principle concerning Biblical inspiration be recognized. The fact that an event is recorded in Scripture does not necessarily suggest that the Lord approved of it. It is a fundamental feature of inspired Scripture that it documents the sins and follies of both its heroes and villains alike, the good and the bad.

The truth is, any attempt to justify adultery by appealing to David is akin to the distorted perversions of rabbinical Judaism than to accurate biblical exegesis. The Jewish Talmud seeks to justify the adultery of David on the ground that every soldier, before going into battle, was required to grant his wife a divorce; according to that twist, Bathsheba was actually free (Edersheim, IV, p. 191).

Moreover, if David’s marriage to Bathsheba is to be employed as a pattern for illustrating God’s marriage code under the law of Christ, then polygamy becomes permissible. History reveals that Bathsheba was only one of eight wives (in addition to a number of concubines) which the king had (1 Sam. 18:27; 25:42-43; 1 Chron. 3:2-5).

And, as noted scholar Dean Stanley observed: 'His crime itself had sprung from the lawless and licentious life, fostered by the polygamy which he had been the first to introduce into the monarchy …' (II, p. 195).

The Mosaic Law principle certainly was applicable in the David-Bathsheba affair. They committed adultery. Had the law of Moses been strictly executed, they both would have been put to death.

'And the man that committeth adultery with another man’s wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbor’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death' (Lev. 20:10)

Nevertheless, because of God’s forbearance, Nathan informed the king: 'Jehovah also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die' (2 Sam. 12:13).

God bless---Twospirits

[Rose]

Good morning Rose.

I have some questions for you.

Q1. Do you support the death penalty for some crimes?

Q2. What crimes do you think deserve the death penalty?

If you support the death penalty, would you;

Q3. administer the punishment upon criminals who under the law should be put to death?

Q4. personally kill the criminal punishable by death, whether that be by hanging, electric chair or the method of your choice? Note. You will be seen publicly to be the one performing the death penalty.

Q5. prefer anonymity? Note: Throwing stones gives anonymity, and is not a slow death but quick. You perceive it to be slow.

Q6. What other forms of capital punishment do you think were appropriate in those days given extremely limited resources?

Q7. Was crucifixion better or worse than stoning?

Q8. What other forms of capital punishment are practiced in the world today and are they any better than stoning?


I look forward to your answers.

David

Good morning David,

Sorry, I guess I missed this post with your questions, I will answer in red.


Q1. Do you support the death penalty for some crimes? No

Q2. What crimes do you think deserve the death penalty? None, whereas the biblegod thinks that picking up sticks on the Sabbath requires the death penalty, and women who commit adultery...but not a man, especially a man who has a high position like King David!

If you support the death penalty, would you;

Q3. administer the punishment upon criminals who under the law should be put to death? One of the big problems I see with the death penalty is asking a person who has no involvement with the guilty party to be the one who does the execution.

Q4. personally kill the criminal punishable by death, whether that be by hanging, electric chair or the method of your choice? Note. You will be seen publicly to be the one performing the death penalty. Again, I do not believe in the death penalty, there is too much room for error.

Q5. prefer anonymity? Note: Throwing stones gives anonymity, and is not a slow death but quick. You perceive it to be slow. No, it's not what I perceive it's actually true. When a stoning is carried out smaller stones are purposely chosen, so as to prolong the suffering.

Q6. What other forms of capital punishment do you think were appropriate in those days given extremely limited resources? If I had to choose a form of capital punishment, it would be the most humane possible, like the sword.

Q7. Was crucifixion better or worse than stoning? Crucifixion was horrible too. If god is so big on capital punishment why doesn't he just "zap" every guilty person dead like Annanias and Sapphira?

Q8. What other forms of capital punishment are practiced in the world today and are they any better than stoning? I'm surprised you have to ask...have you no compassion or empathy for human suffering, it's pretty obvious that stoning was chosen for its brutality!

[Greatest I am]

I have some questions for you.

Q1. Do you support the death penalty for some crimes?

I do not. It is a cop out for society not taking responsibility for creating the killers.
We all contribute to what they are. They are made that way, not born that way.
We just want to bury our own mistakes.

Can people or a nation push for veneration of life while taking it?
No they cannot.

Do innocent people end up dying on death row?
Yes. Statistics are dismal for those found innocent after their death.

How many mistakes would you allow before changing your mind?


Q5. Throwing stones gives anonymity, and is not a slow death but quick. You perceive it to be slow.



Untrue.
The practice includes using small stones to prolong the death as it is to be a community execution.

If you believe in a slow death for them, who is benefitting from the victims slow death?
The people are.
Is that blood lust really something that justice should try to appease?

Regards
DL