Can We Obey God and also Vote for a Woman?

[jaybo]

Absolutely. But you should realize that the men Peter et al were speaking to were the High Priest and his Sadducean cohorts, NOT the Roman secular government.

How did our Lord legally ** let the woman in John 8 go who was caught in adultery?

** according to the Law of Moses

The story of the woman caught in adultery is not found in the earliest texts. It was most probably added at a later time by a creative scribe. Therefore it is inappropriate to consider it as true scripture and basis any kind of doctrine on it.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

The story of the woman caught in adultery is not found in the earliest texts. It was most probably added at a later time by a creative scribe. Therefore it is inappropriate to consider it as true scripture and basis any kind of doctrine on it.

How can you not believe the Bible?
Tsk tsk, bad boy.

 

[OzSpen]

Absolutely. But you should realize that the men Peter et al were speaking to were the High Priest and his Sadducean cohorts, NOT the Roman secular government.

How did our Lord legally ** let the woman in John 8 go who was caught in adultery?

** according to the Law of Moses

D,

The principle still applies. We must obey God rather than human beings. If the New Covenant law clashes with the laws of government, we must obey the NT law.

If you do an in-depth study of John 7:53-8:11 (NIV), you will find the "adulterous woman" section was not in the original text. Modern English versions are correct in separating it from the rest of the narrative - as with the NIV and RSV. The verses are absent from most of the early Greek MSS.

Oz

 

[D-D-W]

The principle still applies. We must obey God rather than human beings. If the New Covenant law clashes with the laws of government, we must obey the NT law.

I do not disagree with that.

If you do an in-depth study of John 7:53-8:11 (NIV), you will find the "adulterous woman" section was not in the original text. Modern English versions are correct in separating it from the rest of the narrative - as with the NIV and RSV. The verses are absent from most of the early Greek MSS.

It was, however, included in the earliest Aramaic manuscripts which are of equal age with the earliest Greek manuscripts. So I take it as original and authoritative.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

I don't know how people can question the validity of the Bible.
The whole thing is from God.

 

[jaybo]

I don't know how people can question the validity of the Bible.
The whole thing is from God.

Of course, many, many, many people question the assumption that the Bible is from God. There is no proof, so their unregenerated minds can't absorb the truth.

 

[eddif]

Can we back up to here?

Jeremiah 3:8 kjv
8. And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

Honestely. Is this a disputed passage?

Can we see any parallels with the OP?

Was Israel and Judah ever forgiven?

Were some of Israel and Judah spared? Who?

eddif

 

[D-D-W]

Disputed? Not really.
Misunderstood? Very much so.

Israel (10 northern tribes) were divorced from God and sent away by the Assyrians. But many believe that included the southern kingdom Judah as well. It did not; even though they were doing most of the same things.

So Israel was kicked out of the covenant but Judah was left in. In part I think that had to do with the royal Messianic lineage of David being in tribe Judah.

 

[D-D-W]

Was Israel and Judah ever forgiven?
Were some of Israel and Judah spared? Who?

Nationally forgiven, there is no indication one way or the other. At least at present. Romans 11.26 tells us that at some point in the future "all Israel shall be saved." Just those from Judah, or does it include the Northern tribes? Were there enough of the northern tribes who escaped to the south or eventually made their way back to make them included? Unknown.

As an aside, a huge number of a tribe that calls themselves Benai Ephraim (sons of Ephraim) from eastern India have moved to the state of Israel. When England partitioned India and Pakistan, they petitioned to form an Israelite (Jewish) state but were turned down.

In Romans 11 "Israel" is called "enemies of the gospel," so clearly Paul is not talking about the church. They will all be saved meaning they will all repent, embrace the Gospel and be forgiven and saved.

 

[eddif]

There is a dispersion not associated with Assyria
But ( the nations ?). Isaiah talks of the sanctuary they have in dispersion). IMHO these people with grief are the ones at Pentecost.


Ezekiel 9:4 kjv
4. And the LORD said unto him, Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry for all the abominations that be done in the midst thereof.
5. And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity:

9. Then said he unto me, The iniquity of the house of Israel and Judah is exceeding great, and the land is full of blood, and the city full of perverseness: for they say, The LORD hath forsaken the earth, and the LORD seeth not.
10. And as for me also, mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity, but I will recompense their way upon their head.
11. Just then, the man clothed with linen, who hadthe inkhorn at his side, reported back and said, “I have done as You commanded me.”

That would leave a remnant returning from dispersion so that all the Jews might be saved, but I am just a redneck. The bad guys were left in Jerusalem for destruction.
Those in dispersion retained their identity (?). Those in Jerusalem suffered from ultimate Roman rule. The issue of Nationalism?

What makes me a messed up (Gentile Christian).
I have read through the OT 3? Times. I have taught Isiah area books 2? Times.
That does not make me an expert.
Romans 3:1 kjv
1. What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
2. Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God

So I spend a lot of time in an area that teaches the oracles of God. I also read about the one new man, and try to allow what has happened to work smoothly,

I will take all the help I can get.

eddif

 

[OzSpen]

I do not disagree with that.

It was, however, included in the earliest Aramaic manuscripts which are of equal age with the earliest Greek manuscripts. So I take it as original and authoritative.

You're pushing an uphill battle. The NT was based primarily on the Greek. Seems like you have a fixation to retain the woman in adultery in the NT.

Bye,
Oz

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

You're pushing an uphill battle. The NT was based primarily on the Greek. Seems like you have a fixation to retain the woman in adultery in the NT.

Bye,
Oz

You seem to have a fixation to doubt the validity of the Bible.
They say smart people sometimes think too much.
1 Corinthians 1:19;
“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate.”

 

[eddif]

In Romans 11 "Israel" is called "enemies of the gospel," so clearly Paul is not talking about the church. They will all be saved meaning they will all repent, embrace the Gospel and be forgiven and saved.

I think I have said this but you have made a comment that may help.

The church is first mainly Jewish on the day of Pentecost. (Jewish sons and daughters that prophesy). Later the Gentile inclusion happens.

In Christ the one new man exists in the church. If we say Israel we are probably talking about those who would have Gentiles keep all the law of Moses (circumcision party). Israel and Judah would probably be in the Church. The circumcision party may be those who have yet to enter the Church (?).

The council at Jerusalem finally gave the avoidance of (blood and fornication?) as suggested guidelines for Gentiles.

Still I am not Jewish after the flesh . I am a new man with Jews and Gentiles male female bond and free.

eddif

 

[eddif]

What makes the 400 year of dispersion hard to
understand? Because it also called the 400 years of silence. The prophecy is stated in the open, but no it is not described during the 400 years of silence.

Ezekiel 6:& kjv
8. Yet will I leave a remnant, that ye may have some that shall escape the sword among the nations, when ye shall be scattered through the countries.
9. And they that escape of you shall remember me among the nations whither they shall be carried captives, because I am broken with their whorish heart, which hath departed from me, and with their eyes, which go a whoring after their idols: and they shall lothe themselves for the evils which they have committed in all their abominations.

Ezekiel 11:16 kjv
16. Therefore say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Although I have cast them far off among the heathen, and although I have scattered them among the countries, yet will I be to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they shall come.

eddif

 

[eddif]

It was, however, included in the earliest Aramaic manuscripts which are of equal age with the earliest Greek manuscripts. So I take it as original and authoritative.

Ok
Let us say that is one witness.

Can we find a concept parallel in another context that would support the concept of forgiveness of sins when others are asking for punishment?

The.book of Job has friends condemning Job and God telling of his uprightness. Not the exact same thing but in the area.

Is there another NT parallel?

eddif

 

[D-D-W]

Ok
Let us say that is one witness.
eddif

Since when does the bible itself need more than one "witness?"

"2 or 3 witnesses" were for accusations against someone.

 

[OzSpen]

Since when does the bible itself need more than one "witness?"

"2 or 3 witnesses" were for accusations against someone.

DDW,

Luke 1:2 (NIV) notes "those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word." Were they more than one "witness"?

Oz

 

[D-D-W]

DDW,
Luke 1:2 (NIV) notes "those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word." Were they more than one "witness"?
Oz

Not the same thing and you know it.

 

[OzSpen]

Not the same thing and you know it.

DDW,

Sadly, you're a false mind reader.

Oz

 

[D-D-W]

DDW, Sadly, you're a false mind reader.

Oz, apparently I sadly mistook you for being more biblically literate than you are.