- This topic is empty.
- Posts
I came across this verse today and I thought about it for a while and it is a bit troubling to me.
“If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible.” (Exodus 21:28)
At first when reading this, one might think that they are just getting rid of an animal that is dangerous. However, the killing is not done in the ordinary way of an animal slaughter. Rather, the bull is to be stoned. Because of the slow death, stoning is effectively, death by torture.
If animals act on instinct and feels threatened or whatever and gores a human, the Israelites had to torture the animal to death.
Is the animal being punished for a moral crime? That seems impossible. Can an animal sin? Did animals inherit sin? Were not animals given instinct, as opposed to free will? If animals can't willingly choose to do something they know is wrong, then what is the point of torturing them to death?
Maybe being an animal lover I am too sensitive to this. Maybe they lived in a time where death of animals was a common experience for everyone.
But none the less, I don't really understand the stoning. Nineveh was spared because it's inhabitants and the animals could not distinguish between right and wrong. (Jonah 4:11)
There is no judgement for animals when they die, because there is no moral choices to make. Why then, is the goring bull stoned to death and not simply slaughtered?The law similarly states that if a man has bestial relations with an animal, both the man and the animal are to be stoned. The man is aware of this law and willfully chooses to do wrongly. The animal had no choice, yet it is tortured to death because of the man's actions. In what way did the animal sin?
(Doing research, one explanation, is that because the animal in this case is connected to a shameful act, it should be put to death. But this in no way explains why it has to be stoned.)The only thing close to a logical explanation that I can think of is that the torturing of the animal is really to punish the owner, so that he is more careful in the future.
This is an overly simple explanation, because we also know that if the owner had already been warned once about the animal and the animal then gored and killed someone, both the bull and the man were to be stoned to death. So, the idea of torturing and killing the bull in order to instill into the man the idea to be more careful does not make sense.
Adding to this, even an ownerless bull was to be stoned to death. If a bull exists and gores someone and no one has a clue who the bull belongs to, the bull is still stoned.
So the only possible explanation left is that this cruel death is to make all onlookers aware of the severity of allowing a bull to gore a man–to teach everyone how terrible the crimes of murder and bestiality are.
Maybe I shouldn't be looking at this from the point of view of the bull. But I'm having trouble seeing it from a viewpoint that makes sense to me.
Thoughts?
Quote (david @ Dec. 20 2010,17:27) But I'm having trouble seeing it from a viewpoint that makes sense to me. Thoughts?
I have the same trouble making sense of most
the stonings to death that God commanded.I couldn't imagine stoning my son to death because
he sassed me back, or stoning to death my neighbor
who happens to be attracted to someone of the same sex.But to answer your question, perhaps they stoned things
to death because nobody had guns.Tim
Quote (david @ Dec. 20 2010,17:27) I came across this verse today and I thought about it for a while and it is a bit troubling to me. “If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten. But the owner of the bull will not be held responsible.” (Exodus 21:28)
At first when reading this, one might think that they are just getting rid of an animal that is dangerous. However, the killing is not done in the ordinary way of an animal slaughter. Rather, the bull is to be stoned. Because of the slow death, stoning is effectively, death by torture.
If animals act on instinct and feels threatened or whatever and gores a human, the Israelites had to torture the animal to death.
Is the animal being punished for a moral crime? That seems impossible. Can an animal sin? Did animals inherit sin? Were not animals given instinct, as opposed to free will? If animals can't willingly choose to do something they know is wrong, then what is the point of torturing them to death?
Maybe being an animal lover I am too sensitive to this. Maybe they lived in a time where death of animals was a common experience for everyone.
But none the less, I don't really understand the stoning. Nineveh was spared because it's inhabitants and the animals could not distinguish between right and wrong. (Jonah 4:11)
There is no judgement for animals when they die, because there is no moral choices to make. Why then, is the goring bull stoned to death and not simply slaughtered?The law similarly states that if a man has bestial relations with an animal, both the man and the animal are to be stoned. The man is aware of this law and willfully chooses to do wrongly. The animal had no choice, yet it is tortured to death because of the man's actions. In what way did the animal sin?
(Doing research, one explanation, is that because the animal in this case is connected to a shameful act, it should be put to death. But this in no way explains why it has to be stoned.)The only thing close to a logical explanation that I can think of is that the torturing of the animal is really to punish the owner, so that he is more careful in the future.
This is an overly simple explanation, because we also know that if the owner had already been warned once about the animal and the animal then gored and killed someone, both the bull and the man were to be stoned to death. So, the idea of torturing and killing the bull in order to instill into the man the idea to be more careful does not make sense.
Adding to this, even an ownerless bull was to be stoned to death. If a bull exists and gores someone and no one has a clue who the bull belongs to, the bull is still stoned.
So the only possible explanation left is that this cruel death is to make all onlookers aware of the severity of allowing a bull to gore a man–to teach everyone how terrible the crimes of murder and bestiality are.
Maybe I shouldn't be looking at this from the point of view of the bull. But I'm having trouble seeing it from a viewpoint that makes sense to me.
Thoughts?
Stoning is a form of group capital punishment it is done as a groupso that no individual among the group can be identified as the one who killed the person or animal.Timothy, is actually correct it would be similar to a firing squad of today.
Also it should be noted that according to Jewish traditions there were very few stonings ever carried out. Also I would say that a group having to take part in a group killing may cause the entire group to detest any such act that would have those consequences.
Regarding animals “sinning” there is no reason to believe that animals do not make choices for instance I know my dog is aware of most things he does and will show shame if he does something known and taught to him to be wrong. Remember, sin is essentially a lack of control that can result in death.
Just like Cain lost control and sinned killing Abel with a stone
Quote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 20 2010,21:30) Quote (david @ Dec. 20 2010,17:27) But I'm having trouble seeing it from a viewpoint that makes sense to me. Thoughts?
I have the same trouble making sense of most
the stonings to death that God commanded.I couldn't imagine stoning my son to death because
he sassed me back, or stoning to death my neighbor
who happens to be attracted to someone of the same sex.But to answer your question, perhaps they stoned things
to death because nobody had guns.Tim
Hi tim.
But they had knives and they commonly did kill and slaughter bulls.Quote (david @ Dec. 21 2010,00:33) Quote (TimothyVI @ Dec. 20 2010,21:30) Quote (david @ Dec. 20 2010,17:27) But I'm having trouble seeing it from a viewpoint that makes sense to me. Thoughts?
I have the same trouble making sense of most
the stonings to death that God commanded.I couldn't imagine stoning my son to death because
he sassed me back, or stoning to death my neighbor
who happens to be attracted to someone of the same sex.But to answer your question, perhaps they stoned things
to death because nobody had guns.Tim
Hi tim.
But they had knives and they commonly did kill and slaughter bulls.
I just explained to you why. They stoned the animal so no one person would know they killed the person or animal.Quote I just explained to you why. They stoned the animal so no one person would know they killed the person or animal. Hi bod.
I realize that is the deal behind stoning, so that no one is the executioner of a human. However, people killed animals all the time.
It's the stoning (torture) that I wonder about, when someone could have simply killed it?Quote (david @ Dec. 21 2010,14:18) Quote I just explained to you why. They stoned the animal so no one person would know they killed the person or animal. Hi bod.
I realize that is the deal behind stoning, so that no one is the executioner of a human. However, people killed animals all the time.
It's the stoning (torture) that I wonder about, when someone could have simply killed it?
people only killed animals for food all the time not as a penalty or punishment. I do understand why it bothers you but it could also have been used for some type war training because war is extremely violent and torturous and often the Children of Israel were afraid to fight in-fact that's the main reason they had to wander in the desert because they feared war and killing more than Godlike the same used as lethal injection, the more involved no one really knows. so really the idea has evoloved using for use of a better word.
i agree the animal must be put down, I do not agree with the method however i do not see where the animal would seem unclean for eating.
bd, once again you speak of war.
maybe its for the victims family. able to rebuke the feeling of revenge, or any other feeling to cause them to stumble away from God.
such hatred or any other emotion that results from a tragedy most be dealt with Justice.
Animals dont know the difference between right or wrong, so maybe since we do, it saves us from commiting more injustices.
Maybe it gives the family closure, since many were ignorant in those days.2. and it also saves the OWNER of the animal from Hatred, revenge, or responsibility for such a crime.
maybe it ties in how the lamb is used for atonement.
IMO
Quote Animals dont know the difference between right or wrong, –SF
That is my point. The bull never read the law and wasn't told of the consequences. but even if it had been it would still not know right from wrong. So if the owner is to be punished, give his bull to the family of the gored man or kill the bull so the owner suffers loss. But it seems punishment is meant for the unknowing bull if it is to be stoned.
Quote (david @ Dec. 23 2010,09:10) Quote Animals dont know the difference between right or wrong, –SF
That is my point. The bull never read the law and wasn't told of the consequences. but even if it had been it would still not know right from wrong. So if the owner is to be punished, give his bull to the family of the gored man or kill the bull so the owner suffers loss. But it seems punishment is meant for the unknowing bull if it is to be stoned.
again maybe its closure for the family to keep them from taking vegenace.Quote (SimplyForgiven @ Dec. 23 2010,18:05) Quote (david @ Dec. 23 2010,09:10) Quote Animals dont know the difference between right or wrong, –SF
That is my point. The bull never read the law and wasn't told of the consequences. but even if it had been it would still not know right from wrong. So if the owner is to be punished, give his bull to the family of the gored man or kill the bull so the owner suffers loss. But it seems punishment is meant for the unknowing bull if it is to be stoned.
again maybe its closure for the family to keep them from taking vegenace.
Hi SF,Good point! The family shouldn't blame the owner of the animal.
God bless
Ed J (Joshua 22:34)
http://www.holycitybiblecode.orghow so SF, killing of animal to killing of a human. there are many texts that read an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.
i think there to be more to this law, a clause that states if the owner knew or had been warned about the animal's behavior, punishment then fell upon the owner of the animal.
now if the animal being a danger to the tribe, i could see the animal being put to death, still I cannot see why the animal could not be eaten, unless you reference that animal's can hold spirits, which if you recall, the herd swine that threw itself over the cliff due to recieving unclean spirits.
then you go into gnostics which believe in the demiurge, that can inhabit any creature, due to the fact that it created them.
then you could also reference the importance of animals with sacrifice, apparently this would even not be considered due to the animal would be considered unfit for god.
for something of such a small nature, has alot of thoughts attached to them.
Insurance companies still have such a thing as an “Act of god”. What if the incident of goring was the mysterious way god chose to enact his vengeance on a wayward human?
Rather cruel then to have a scripture that commands other humans kill the ox that did god's dirty work.
Still, the scriptures have it in for poor old satan, when it was he who did god's dirty work on another occasion…
Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 27 2010,09:12)
Still, the scriptures have it in for poor old satan, when it was he who did god's dirty work on another occasion…Stuart
Hi Stuart,An atheist through and through.
Quote What if the incident of goring was the mysterious way god chose to enact his vengeance on a wayward human? i would not be too surprised to find this with ancient civilization, everything was due to the unseen god.
however the ancients did not question why such things happened, they accepted it as part of life.
then after that Stuart, your remaining response is stretched even for a believer of the christian faith.
what satan?
Quote (princess of the king @ Dec. 28 2010,07:28) Quote What if the incident of goring was the mysterious way god chose to enact his vengeance on a wayward human? i would not be too surprised to find this with ancient civilization, everything was due to the unseen god.
however the ancients did not question why such things happened, they accepted it as part of life.
then after that Stuart, your remaining response is stretched even for a believer of the christian faith.
what satan?
Indeed! What satan?Stuart
Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 27 2010,18:55) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 27 2010,09:12)
Still, the scriptures have it in for poor old satan, when it was he who did god's dirty work on another occasion…Stuart
Hi Stuart,An atheist through and through.
You know which occasion I mean, don't you Ed!Stuart
Quote (Stu @ Dec. 28 2010,07:46) Quote (Ed J @ Dec. 27 2010,18:55) Quote (Stu @ Dec. 27 2010,09:12)
Still, the scriptures have it in for poor old satan, when it was he who did god's dirty work on another occasion…Stuart
Hi Stuart,An atheist through and through.
You know which occasion I mean, don't you Ed!Stuart
Hi Stuart,No; spell it out.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
