You said — “For all those here who consider stoning to be “barbaric” or “uncivilized,” I’ll remind you that it is a biblically called for punishment for any number of serious crimes including adultery, blasphemy, and disobeying your parents. You know what they say about glass houses and throwing stones.”
—
Well.., let’s clear up this problem for you. The Christians are not called upon to do this. If you think that there is something in the Bible that has called upon the Christians to do this — you are sadly mistaken. It doesn’t exist.
For the Jews, that’s another matter. It was definitely a penalty in their day. It is no longer a penalty today, for the Jews.
So, what’s the most you can say about that? Well, that for a period of time, the Jews were commanded to do this (but the Christians were *never* commanded to do this at *any time*, past or present). After that, the Jews no longer did it.
Therefore the “glass house” that you’re talking about doesn’t exist. It did at one time, and was abandoned long ago (the “glass house” of stoning). It never did exist for the Christians.
That glass house, if you’re bringing it up today, is simply a figment of your imagination.
On the other hand, what people are talking about in this thread is something that happens *today* and not two thousand years ago (and only for a small minority of people — versus about 1.2 billion Muslims [although we’re not talking about Muslims in this article, though — but a “practice”]).
Thus, one *can certainly* throw stones and crack all the windows in this house...
What God were those Jews worshiping at the time? Was it the same God you and other Christians worship today, or was it a different God? I will go out on a limb and answer the rest of your post assuming that Christians worship the same God.
Well, that for a period of time, the Jews were commanded to do this (but the Christians were *never* commanded to do this at *any time*, past or present).
For a significant period of time, the Christian God ordered his followers to use this "barbaric" method of execution against individuals for trivial offenses. To believe, therefore, that stoning is barbaric, or that stoning to punish trivial offenses is barbaric, is to believe that the Christian God ordered his people to engage in barbarism as an official practice. Hence, the glass house. If it's barbaric when the Yezidi or the Muslims do it today, then it was barbaric when the Christian God's followers did it in the past under his command.
On the other hand, what people are talking about in this thread is something that happens *today* and not two thousand years ago..
When in time the stoning for a trivial offense occurs has absolutely no bearing on whether or not it is barbaric. The issue here is, can Christians credibly denounce the practice of stoning someone over a trivial offense when their own God once commanded his followers to do the very same thing?
* "Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets... Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Whoever therefore breaks one of the least of these commandments, and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever does and teaches them, he shall be called great..." Mat. 5:17-19
It was definitely a penalty in their day. It is no longer a penalty today, for the Jews.
Jesus directly counters you...
* "Why do you also transgress the commandment of God because of your tradition? For God commanded, saying... `He who curses father or mother, let him be put to death.' But you say..." Mat. 15:3-4
Therefore the “glass house” that you’re talking about doesn’t exist. It did at one time, and was abandoned long ago (the “glass house” of stoning). It never did exist for the Christians.
"Judge Not" is hypocrite haven. He who lives in a glass house should not throw stones. Such Christians, though, should relocate. Move into "the temple of the great God, which is being built with heavy stones" (Ezra 5:8).
Christians live in the "building" for which Christ is "the chief corner stone" (Eph. 2:20). And if that Stone falls on someone it "will grind him to powder" (Mat. 21:44; Luke 20:18; cf. Ex. 32:20). It is better to be judged by a Christian than crushed by Christ.
On the “glass house” matter.
Though the specifics of many punishments for “sins” commanded in the old testament, are not considered biblical commands, with that specificity, to “Christians”, many of the “sins” that those old testament punishments referred to did continue to carry equal weight of “sinfulness” to “Christians” and Jews, and many punishments relative to those sins, in the early centuries of Christianity and up through the late Medieval age would be considered “inhumane” or “brutal” in the context of most “western” Jewish and Christian societies today.
The larger difference is that Islamic fundamentalist movements today seek the protection of or restoration of 7th century Islamic culture; a 7th century culture that we reject more than, but just as well as we would reject domination today by 7th century European “Christian” religious culture, and it’s influence on “law and punishment” with respect to “sin”.
The larger difference is that Islamic fundamentalists seek to restore a “pure” Islam and a pure culture founded on Islam, which was the culture that destroyed their “Empire” because its brutality and domination was (1)rejected by the west, and (2)that rejection led to the crusades which led to the Renaissance, which led to the “reformation” and the Enlightenment, which steadily moved western culture from its own 7th century rigidities - a process that the Shia Mullahs of Iran, the Wahabi clerics of Saudi Arabia, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic fundamentalists seek to prevent from happening within Islam and within cultures dominated by Islam.
I am not saying this to advocate for or promote “Islam”, only to layout the rejectionist mode (rejection of internal critical debate of Islamic thought and rejection of “secular” authority) that all modern fundamentalist Islamic movements have as the starting point of their own brand of Islamic political thought. They seek a return to the 7th and 8th centuries, as the “high point” of Islamic thought.