So we agree now with the Catholics in finding degrees of sin? Adultery between two jews was punishable by death, I see no lesser punishment for adultery with a gentile, both punishable by death. Harry Chad Richard Bresson <breusswane@...> wrote: > The phrase that the people began to play the harlot with the daughters > Moab > is sexual in nature and describes a relation of adultery. They were > unfaithful. > "(which is always contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other > nations)" > Is that not adultery? There is adultery. And then there's adultery with a Gentile. IMHO, there *is* a difference. Not all adultery in the OT is equivalent (although all adultery was considered a capital offense). Lev. is talking about the former. The Phinehas event is in regarding the latter. "Degrees of offense" might be a paraphrase. Chad Richard Bresson Xenia, OH http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "H Dorrington" To: Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 5:12 PM Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] John 8:11 and Condemn > The phrase that the people began to play the harlot with the daughters > Moab > is sexual in nature and describes a relation of adultery. They were > unfaithful. > > Psalm 106:30 & 31 offer an interesting view of the events which I would > view > as a narrative when compared to Numbers 24. > > "(which is always contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other > nations)" > Is that not adultery? > > Harry > > Chad Richard Bresson wrote: >> Your assumption is that the instructions in Dt 13 &17 that is specific >> for >> those who are worshipping false gods is >applicable to those caught in >> the >> act of adultery as well as all capital punishment cases yet you won't >> give >> the same value to >Leviticus 24:13 & 14 since the instruction does not >> comply with your view. > > Not because "it does not comply with my view" but because one is narrative > (a story about a woman and her son) and the other is precept (thou shalt > not). A basic rule of hermeneutics is not to confuse genre. > >> In a similar fashion you found fault with the Numbers passage that had >> the >> adulterous couple killed not by stones but by a >sword or spear, yet even >> a third manner of punishment by drinking bitter waters is given in >> Scripture. > > Again, you are, IMHO, confusing genre and not following a basic rule of > hermeneutics. The Numbers passage is a narrative which makes no judgment > about the adultery, but does about the jealousy (which is always > contextualized in the OT by Israel's whoring with other nations). God > himself, in his speaking with Moses, draws a one-to-one correlation > between > jealousy and Phinehas actions. You are drawing an inference that may or > may > not be there because the text does not explicitly tell us that Phinehas > acted as an executioner for adultery. It *does* say Phinehas was jealous > for God... and that is how we must interpret the event. Now, if you want > to > parallel the *jealousy* in the passage with capital actions against > adultery > you might be making an only slightly better case hermeneutically. > > But then again, this *jealousy* is directly correlative to whoring with a > pagan nation, IMHO, and not necessarily adultery because the entire > passage > is not about adultery but about Israel's prostituting itself with > Gentiles. > To focus on the adultery is to miss Moses' point entirely. > > Chad Richard Bresson > Xenia, OH > http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "H Dorrington" > To: > Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 3:59 PM > Subject: Re: [soundofgrace] John 8:11 and Condemn > > >> >> In a similar fashion you found fault with the Numbers passage that had >> the >> adulterous couple killed not by stones but by a sword or spear, yet even >> a >> third manner of punishment by drinking bitter waters is given in >> Scripture. Your jot and tittle view of only accepting one means of >> execution as instruction and dismissing the others as narrative accounts >> seems contrary to the teaching that all scripture is profitable for >> reproof and correction and if God allows these other means of correction >> and blesses them (Num 24) who am I to find fault with Him? >> >> Harry >> >> "Chad R. Bresson" > wrote: >>>H Dorrington wrote: >>>Do you view it as a paraphrased handed down narrative? >> >> If you're asking whether or not I believe Genesis 12:1-3 is a sum total >> of >> every single word God used in his call to Abraham, no. I believe what we >> have is a God-breathed inspired narrative of what God wanted us to know >> about his call to Abraham. >> >> But I believe it was prescriptive to Abraham and Abraham alone. We are >> not >> called to leave our countries (although we are called to leave the >> kingdom >> of darkness) as he was. You've attempted to show that the Lev. 24 >> narrative about a woman and her son somehow negates the very prescriptive >> Deut. passages on witnesses and capital punishment. I grant that to Moses >> and the congregation it was prescriptive in the sense they couldn't >> disobey it. But as narrative it cannot define for us the norm for God's >> mandate on the witnesses being the first to cast stones. Even if I grant >> the prescription within the narrative is *different* (I don't.. I believe >> Moses is only telling us about what happened with the woman and son what >> God wanted us to know about the woman and the son), it would be God's >> perogative to "deviate* from the norm of Deut. 13 & 17 (which is *why* >> Carson would include the Lev. passage with the Deut. passages in his >> apologetic. Leviticus is complementary, not contradictory). >> >> >> Chad Richard Bresson >> Xenia, OH >> http://breusswane.blogspot.com/ >> >> -- >> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >> http://www.soundofgrace.com >> >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >> >> To view our online archive go to our web page at >> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >> >> >> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> http://mail.yahoo.com >> -- >> Read the Sound of Grace pages at >> http://www.soundofgrace.com >> >> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: >> soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... >> >> To view our online archive go to our web page at >> http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace >> >> >> > > -- > Read the Sound of Grace pages at > http://www.soundofgrace.com > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... > > To view our online archive go to our web page at > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace > > > > > > --------------------------------- > Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page > -- > Read the Sound of Grace pages at > http://www.soundofgrace.com > > To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: > soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... > > To view our online archive go to our web page at > http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace > > > -- Read the Sound of Grace pages at http://www.soundofgrace.com To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... To view our online archive go to our web page at http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace --------------------------------- Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page -- Read the Sound of Grace pages at http://www.soundofgrace.com To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: soundofgrace-unsubscribe@... To view our online archive go to our web page at http://www.associate.com/groups/soundofgrace