JOESBUCKS ADDED: "So while Jesus did not comment on the death sentence of the thieves on the cross, he did spare the life of the woman."
She had no trial and was not condemned to death (as were the thieves on the Cross). Her accusers, however, chose not to throw stones when Jesus challenged them to review their own lives.
uh.......buh-bye
We know nothing of their trials if any. And the same of the woman.
Regarding Post #171
"JOESBUCKS RESPONDED TO ME: "However in John 8, while the people [not the governmental authorities] were carrying out the "law" according to Leviticus, Jesus did intervene in the stoning of the adultrous woman, asking those who are sinless to cast the first stone."
JOESBUCKS ADDED: "So while Jesus did not comment on the death sentence of the thieves on the cross, he did spare the life of the woman."
She had no trial and was not condemned to death (as were the thieves on the Cross). Her accusers, however, chose not to throw stones when Jesus challenged them to review their own lives."
I would like to add to your comments to Joebucks that this was not a case of preventing capital punishment. The Jews were not permitted to impose the death penalty on any offense without Roman approval. Had they stoned the woman, the leaders would have been hauled before the Roman authorities. So it is doubtful the people there had any intention of stoning the woman. She was dragged before the Savior in order to trap Him in a have-you-stopped-beating-your-wife-yet? trap. Had the Savior answered that they should not stone the woman, He would have been accused of defying Mosaic law. Had He answered that they should go ahead and stone her, He would have been accused of breaking Roman law and hauled before the Roman authorities. The Savior chose wisely not to answer the question at all. The account should not be used to illustrate the Savior's attitude to capital punishment.
Well Said, Concerned.
Not arguing, but jealous that we rightly divide the Word of Truth.