What's new
By:
Filters
Christian Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why accuse only women?

Classik

Classik

Member
It takes two to commit adultery or fornication or whatever you term it. The NORMAL two are: a male and a female.
Why is it that women are always accused of adultery/fornication when it actually takes 2 to do that?
I think our judgement is unfair and wicked.
In schools, offices etc women are ususlly condemned!!!!
**
**
Read the Old Testament; women were accused and condemned ( although in some cases both were stonned or punished - the male and female involved )

--
--
John 8 NKJV
3 Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst,
4 they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act.
5 Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?â€
++
++
'What a he...'
Where there not two individuals involved?
Why only accuse the woman?
I keep asking 'why'!
Are guys free to...

--
--
Also I wonder why during a wedding only the bride covers her face and the groom does not.
Virgin women cover their faces.
How about men? It is as if guys could do whatever they like and not be accused of past sexual activities!
---
---
Veil both faces, People :lol
Any idea why life is so strange? :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yah, I've always wondered that, too. If she was "Caught in the act" then presumably the guy was THERE, yanno? Seems an odd thing to just not discuss.
 
Classick,

Deuteronomy 22:22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to an husband, then they shall both of them die, both the man that lay with the woman, and the woman: so shalt thou put away evil from Israel.

Jesus was pointing out the hypocrisy of just bringing the woman....

I can't answer why a bride covers her face... Something about purity?... But I don't see it as a negative toward women.
 
The point of the story is Christs fulfillment of the law. The law intended not as man made it.

Jesus was pointing out the hypocrisy of just bringing the woman....
Click to expand...

So very often through Scripture we can see Jesus standing against the majority for the women...:thumbsup


Sheesh it was/is mans world!
 
I guess my question still is - if the LAW says both the man and woman are to be punished, and the woman was caught in the act and the stoning does not include the man, then why would this not be a major topic in the scene? It seems odd to not mention the role of the man at all, even though he was THERE and the law SAYS he is to be punished just as the woman.

Just seems weird to have that not even mentioned in the scene.
 
We dont know what Jesus was writing i the dirt. My guess He was asking your question Himself. Could be He was listing a few "secrets".


Not much different then today Rhea, our laws say no to murder but OJ was free....
 
The double-standard continues today, and sometimes its vicious. When I was in High School, a freshman girl admitted to her mother that she'd had sexual relations with a teacher while in middle school. Yes, you read that right--8th grade. So the mom pursued statutory rape charges, and the guy lost his job. The reaction? The teachers at the HS were angry...at the girl. They talked about how the guy lost his fiancee and his job, and how the girl should've just kept her mouth shut. One teacher wouldn't even meet with the girl after class because he said he didn't "want to be alone with her"--almost his exact words. How messed up is that?

And then there's the story of Tamar (I think). No kids, her husband was dead, she resorted to dressing as a prostitute and getting it on with her father-in-law so she could make a baby. Then the father-in-law wanted her put to death until she brought in evidence (a signet ring, I think) that he was the person she'd slept with. Brave move on her part, but it shows the intense sexism/misogyny that was prevalent in the ancient world. Bad as Jewish and then Christian women had it, though, pagan women almost always had it even worse. Roman wives, for instance, could be divorced at the drop of a hat.
 
Rhea said:
I guess my question still is - if the LAW says both the man and woman are to be punished, and the woman was caught in the act and the stoning does not include the man, then why would this not be a major topic in the scene? It seems odd to not mention the role of the man at all, even though he was THERE and the law SAYS he is to be punished just as the woman.

Just seems weird to have that not even mentioned in the scene.
Click to expand...
And Jesus said, “You have heard that it was said to those of old,<SUP> </SUP>You shall not commit adultery. But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart."
 
Rhea said:
Yah, I've always wondered that, too. If she was "Caught in the act" then presumably the guy was THERE, yanno? Seems an odd thing to just not discuss.
Click to expand...
They didn't care about the woman OR the man... that was all a set-up to trap Jesus.
 
reba said:
We dont know what Jesus was writing i the dirt. My guess He was asking your question Himself. Could be He was listing a few "secrets".
Click to expand...

Which is another thing I've always wondered - if we don't know what he was writing in the dirt, how do we know what he said to the adulteress after every other person had left? Was she interviewed by someone? If so, who?
 
Pizzaguy said:
They didn't care about the woman OR the man... that was all a set-up to trap Jesus.
Click to expand...

Then why set the trap badly? He could as easily have said, "you didn't bring the guy, so you haven't even carried out the law." But he doesn't mention their MAJOR slip-up. That's all - that was big, but it's not worth a mention. Seems odd.


Not that this discussion hinges on this, I'm afraid I've dragged a red herring across the path here, sorry!
 
Rhea said:
I guess my question still is - if the LAW says both the man and woman are to be punished, and the woman was caught in the act and the stoning does not include the man, then why would this not be a major topic in the scene? It seems odd to not mention the role of the man at all, even though he was THERE and the law SAYS he is to be punished just as the woman.

Just seems weird to have that not even mentioned in the scene.
Click to expand...

Rhea,

It should look weird that the man wasn't mentioned.

One thing you need to consider, is that most Jewish boys had Torah memorized verbatim by the age of 9ish. By 13 they had the whole Bible memorized and had the oral traditions (arguments) as well. One thing that the Jews hold to, even to day, is that how you live matters to God, and Torah (books of Moses) was the outline.

But the point of the story Rhea isn't about adultery, it's about this.

Verse 6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him.

The above reason is the purpose of the story. It wasn't about the woman, it was about Jesus. I've already posted the OT passage that every Jewish boy had memorized and the "teachers" of the law also very well knew. Aside from that, Torah also teaches that you have to have witnesses, especially when stoning was issued (I can't remember what verse that was or I'd post it), so we have another issue with the scene and that's "Where are the witnesses", because nobody could be condemned without two or more witnesses that were in agreement, and everybody knew that.

If anyone threw a rock, let alone condemned her, they would have been guilty of sin... Even Jesus... And they all knew it. This is why "This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him."
 
That is what I was getting at: it was an attempted set-up of Jesus.

The woman was just being used like a tool, with no regard for her at all.

And yes, it was rather sexist of them - but these guys didn't have much character, that is for sure.
 
Pizzaguy said:
That is what I was getting at: it was an attempted set-up of Jesus.

The woman was just being used like a tool, with no regard for her at all.

And yes, it was rather sexist of them - but these guys didn't have much character, that is for sure.
Click to expand...

:thumbsup
 
Great posts!

++
**
I still believe it is unfair when women are always blamed and condemned and criticized for cases of sexual immorality involving both sexes. The world is always quick in criticising the female gender on such issues.
Condemn a woman; Condemn a guy.
 
Classik,
Glad you have a good compass for right and wrong :thumbsup

When I was growing up, it was cool for guys to have all the women they could get in the sack, but the gals who slept around were called.. well... not to nice of things.

Also, when a man had a affair with a woman (such as Bill Clinton), the woman was put through more shame than the man when your right, they both should be equally to blame.
 
This topic always gets pulled off track. The trapping of Christ, His fulfilling of the law , is the topic or the point of the passage. Never have i seen this topic stay on track in forums or Bible studies.


Seems this is used to try and show a lack of justice, a lack of something in Christ, Christianity, The scriptures..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi Reba,

I think Classik (and others) didn't have an understanding of the passage, and as so often happens, misapplied scripture.

I'd like to think that the issue was more about the title "Why accuse only women", than the scripture submitted :)
 
Going with the title, "Why accuse women?" or in other words "Why are women always painted the evil, sinful ones?"

I think it goes all the way back to the Garden and God's curse on Satan.

"And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel." (Genesis 3:15)

We tend to just remember the part about "between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel", but we tend to sort of rush over the whole, "I will put enmity between you and the woman."

Satan hates women...he fully and truly hates women with vengeance. That's why he tempts men into thinking that women are always to blame for everything.

It's a spiritual issue, not cultural or social, but a spiritual issue so deeply rooted it reaches all the way back to the first woman.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top