Madonna & Jerry Falwell

Dream

Well-Known Member
Messages
3,677
Reaction score
2
Points
0
Location
Eastern USA
I use Maddona as an example of someone publically accused and Jerry as someone that did the accusing, because it became subsequently obvious whom God honored. Open to all contributors.

I Samuel 1:16-17 Do not regard your maidservant as a base woman, for all along I have been speaking out of my great anxiety and vexation." Then Eli answered, "Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him."

"Go in peace!" It is an interesting verse, because a this prayerful woman was mistaken for a base person by none other than the high priest. Later in chapter sixteen of the same book the prophet Samuel says "But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for the LORD sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart."(Som16:7) This is really the theme of the book of Samuel, which tells the beginnings of the dynasties of Israel's first human kings. It is in I Samuel that David, still a boy, defeats a bear, a lion, and a giant. Who would have thought that visual appraisals could be so far off? Would that we could each learn to simply say "Go in peace."

This is similar to the words that Jesus speaks to a certain woman charged with adultery, caught in the act by the apparently pious and publically exposed. To her he said "Go your way and sin no more," a clear reference to the path of peace; and she had apparently and clearly broken faith with her community. Furthermore in the story Jesus was the only person present truly without sin, so it should have been his responsibility to throw the first stone. That is one way of reading the law, as the stoning could not commence unless a person without sin started it. Now you could argue that the unnamed woman's accusers were blameless, but Jesus was levels above what was considered sinless even by them. There was no one else qualified, so the duty fell to him. In fact, without his stone justice could not proceed! Jesus surely would not have broken the law, there must some other explanation for his action. Unfortunately, he never really explained it openly but merely wrote his answer in the sand. Few people if any know what it was that he wrote. It is a lost commentary, which we must strive to read without being able to see it.

It is interesting that false judgments come from observation, but righteous judgments come when we know that we cannot judge correctly.
 
I use Maddona as an example of someone publically accused and Jerry as someone that did the accusing, because it became subsequently obvious whom God honored. Open to all contributors.

I Samuel 1:16-17 Do not regard your maidservant as a base woman, for all along I have been speaking out of my great anxiety and vexation." Then Eli answered, "Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him."

"Go in peace!" It is an interesting verse, because a this prayerful woman was mistaken for a base person by none other than the high priest. Later in chapter sixteen of the same book the prophet Samuel says "But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for the LORD sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart."(Som16:7) This is really the theme of the book of Samuel, which tells the beginnings of the dynasties of Israel's first human kings. It is in I Samuel that David, still a boy, defeats a bear, a lion, and a giant. Who would have thought that visual appraisals could be so far off? Would that we could each learn to simply say "Go in peace."

This is similar to the words that Jesus speaks to a certain woman charged with adultery, caught in the act by the apparently pious and publically exposed. To her he said "Go your way and sin no more," a clear reference to the path of peace; and she had apparently and clearly broken faith with her community. Furthermore in the story Jesus was the only person present truly without sin, so it should have been his responsibility to throw the first stone. That is one way of reading the law, as the stoning could not commence unless a person without sin started it. Now you could argue that the unnamed woman's accusers were blameless, but Jesus was levels above what was considered sinless even by them. There was no one else qualified, so the duty fell to him. In fact, without his stone justice could not proceed! Jesus surely would not have broken the law, there must some other explanation for his action. Unfortunately, he never really explained it openly but merely wrote his answer in the sand. Few people if any know what it was that he wrote. It is a lost commentary, which we must strive to read without being able to see it.

It is interesting that false judgments come from observation, but righteous judgments come when we know that we cannot judge correctly.
Here is my speculation about what Jesus might have written in the sand:
Leviticus 20:10
10 If a man commits adultery (H) with a married woman—if he commits adultery with his neighbor's wife—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Where is the other guilty party? It was the scribes and Pharisees who brought her out, so they knew the Law. (Hence Jesus's words: "The one without sin (K) among you (L) should be the first to throw a stone at her." (M))

They would be sinning by not including both the adulterer and the adulteress in their judgment. {Some of them might have even be obliged to stone themselves, in this case.}
 
I use Maddona as an example of someone publically accused and Jerry as someone that did the accusing, because it became subsequently obvious whom God honored. Open to all contributors.

I Samuel 1:16-17 Do not regard your maidservant as a base woman, for all along I have been speaking out of my great anxiety and vexation." Then Eli answered, "Go in peace, and the God of Israel grant your petition which you have made to him."

"Go in peace!" It is an interesting verse, because a this prayerful woman was mistaken for a base person by none other than the high priest. Later in chapter sixteen of the same book the prophet Samuel says "But the LORD said to Samuel, "Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him; for the LORD sees not as man sees; man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart."(Som16:7) This is really the theme of the book of Samuel, which tells the beginnings of the dynasties of Israel's first human kings. It is in I Samuel that David, still a boy, defeats a bear, a lion, and a giant. Who would have thought that visual appraisals could be so far off? Would that we could each learn to simply say "Go in peace."

This is similar to the words that Jesus speaks to a certain woman charged with adultery, caught in the act by the apparently pious and publically exposed. To her he said "Go your way and sin no more," a clear reference to the path of peace; and she had apparently and clearly broken faith with her community. Furthermore in the story Jesus was the only person present truly without sin, so it should have been his responsibility to throw the first stone. That is one way of reading the law, as the stoning could not commence unless a person without sin started it. Now you could argue that the unnamed woman's accusers were blameless, but Jesus was levels above what was considered sinless even by them. There was no one else qualified, so the duty fell to him. In fact, without his stone justice could not proceed! Jesus surely would not have broken the law, there must some other explanation for his action. Unfortunately, he never really explained it openly but merely wrote his answer in the sand. Few people if any know what it was that he wrote. It is a lost commentary, which we must strive to read without being able to see it.

It is interesting that false judgments come from observation, but righteous judgments come when we know that we cannot judge correctly.
AMEN:eek:...:D
 
dream said:
This is similar to the words that Jesus speaks to a certain woman charged with adultery, caught in the act by the apparently pious and publically exposed. To her he said "Go your way and sin no more," a clear reference to the path of peace; and she had apparently and clearly broken faith with her community. Furthermore in the story Jesus was the only person present truly without sin, so it should have been his responsibility to throw the first stone
But unfortunately as we know that wasn't in the orginal texts, not found till hundreds of years later..who exactly added by we don't know, why we don't know. Tis a scripture we all have loved to quote but unfortunately shouldn't be in scripture.
 
But unfortunately as we know that wasn't in the orginal texts, not found till hundreds of years later..who exactly added by we don't know, why we don't know. Tis a scripture we all have loved to quote but unfortunately shouldn't be in scripture.
Does it represent something Jesus would have done? Maybe it was floating in a pile of papers and nearly burned before somebody found it and put it into the gospel.

seattlegal said:
They would be sinning by not including both the adulterer and the adulteress in their judgment. {Some of them might have even be obliged to stone themselves, in this case.}
Good point. Maybe they made a mistake, maybe several. It says she was caught in the act, which means probably her husband caught her.
 
But unfortunately as we know that wasn't in the orginal texts, not found till hundreds of years later..who exactly added by we don't know, why we don't know. Tis a scripture we all have loved to quote but unfortunately shouldn't be in scripture.
That would be a relief if you are correct, because this passage is like a dried turnip, strictly chewed using one's own saliva. I have been looking everywhere to see how it connects to Scripture, but I am just not sharp enough. It connects very fuzzily to several template decisions in scriptures: Genesis 38:26, Numbers 5:29, Genesis 39:19, Habakkuk 1:13....Genesis 49:7...Deuteronomy 22:19

seattlegal said:
Here is my speculation about what Jesus might have written in the sand:
Leviticus 20:10
10 If a man commits adultery (H) with a married woman—if he commits adultery with his neighbor's wife—both the adulterer and the adulteress must be put to death.

Where is the other guilty party? It was the scribes and Pharisees who brought her out, so they knew the Law. (Hence Jesus's words: "The one without sin (K) among you (L) should be the first to throw a stone at her." (M))

They would be sinning by not including both the adulterer and the adulteress in their judgment. {Some of them might have even be obliged to stone themselves, in this case.}

One guy I met said he thought Jesus was writing down the secret sins of those present, and that was why they were walking away one at a time. I was thinking it might be some sort of magical judgment curse. :rolleyes: Over the years people have made all kinds of guesses about what Jesus wrote in the sand, and I think that is coolness. Until now there was at least 1 thing in the Bible that Christians couldn't argue about. ...But now we finally can argue about whether the passage is real! :p
 
That would be a relief if you are correct, because this passage is like a dried turnip, strictly chewed using one's own saliva. I have been looking everywhere to see how it connects to Scripture, but I am just not sharp enough. It connects very fuzzily to several template decisions in scriptures: Genesis 38:26, Numbers 5:29, Genesis 39:19, Habakkuk 1:13....Genesis 49:7...Deuteronomy 22:19



One guy I met said he thought Jesus was writing down the secret sins of those present, and that was why they were walking away one at a time. I was thinking it might be some sort of magical judgment curse. :rolleyes: Over the years people have made all kinds of guesses about what Jesus wrote in the sand, and I think that is coolness. Until now there was at least 1 thing in the Bible that Christians couldn't argue about. ...But now we finally can argue about whether the passage is real! :p
Me thinks Jesus was writing the formula for the "m-theory", in the sand, and erased it before someone drew what they saw for future generations that would begin to understand it...
 
Does it represent something Jesus would have done? Maybe it was floating in a pile of papers and nearly burned before somebody found it and put it into the gospel.

That would be a relief if you are correct, because this passage is like a dried turnip, strictly chewed using one's own saliva. I have been looking everywhere to see how it connects to Scripture, but I am just not sharp enough. It connects very fuzzily to several template decisions in scriptures: Genesis 38:26, Numbers 5:29, Genesis 39:19, Habakkuk 1:13....Genesis 49:7...Deuteronomy 22:19

Until now there was at least 1 thing in the Bible that Christians couldn't argue about. ...But now we finally can argue about whether the passage is real! :p

Me thinks Jesus was writing the formula for the "m-theory", in the sand, and erased it before someone drew what they saw for future generations that would begin to understand it...
Namaste all,

Most changes or additions like this one, came from scribes who may have heard stories and added it while they were copying, or someone else wrote a note in the margin of what they were copying and they thought it was a correction and then it becomes what everyone is copying and becomes...'gospel'. It very well could be of the ilk of something Jesus might have/would have done..and is used to explain a behaviour that we should assimilate. One that we've got a long way to go on.

Despite not being orginal, it definitely one of my favorites and definitely one that I would like permanently ingrained in my psyche....with it I wouldn't perceive getting rubbed the wrong way by fundies and literalists.
 
Back
Top