'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'- meaningless?

Question

Okay, on the one hand, you can say it's a prohibition, but on the other hand, the 'first stone' was cast long, long ago, so, sinful or not, anyone who wants to can get stuck in, going by that saying. Looking at it in that way, even when it was first said it was redundant.

Answer 1

In biblical times lots of crimes were punishable by stoning. A woman caught in adultery was stoned although the man was not.

When a woman caught in such a crime was brought before him (as a trap for him) he said let he who is pure cast the first stone.

Jesus was saying OK if you are pure and innocent then go ahead and kill the woman, knowing that we all carry sins, although some are very small. He knew it was a trap for him and found an excellent way of escaping it. He told the woman to go and sin no more but this was also a message for those who accused her.

The fist stone literally meant the first stone in the stoning of the woman. Not the first stone ever thrown.

Its not a redundant message. It applies today.

Answer 2

The 'first stone' part isn't the point of the quote; the point is 'let he who is without sin cast'. It is to warn us not to judge others, for we, just as the person we judge, are imperfect. We can't judge other people because we do not know what is in their hearts/minds (we may think we do, but we don't actually know with certainty).

Also, I'd like to address the person who said that Catholics can just commit sins, get absolved, and then go commit the same sins again... quite to the contrary, Catholics can't. The sins are only absolved if the Catholic is truly penitent and has resolved to do their best to never, ever commit those sins again. They don't get a "free absolution".

Answer 3

you're evaluating apples and oranges! The prohibition on homosexuality in the old testomony replaced into approximately disease administration. The colon is stuffed with micro organism that if uncovered to different aspects which includes vagina's ought to offer terrible infections, Infections that must be truthfully taken care of in the present day with antibiotics yet in those days does not be so truthfully taken care of. STD's ought to truly wipe out a city in a count of months. is clever then to restrict risky habit! on your 2nd occasion. The regulation required if a woman and guy be got here upon committing adultery that the two the lady and the guy be stoned. as a effect justice have been perverted via fact the group took the lady yet enable the guy pass. To stone the lady on my own would be a extra perversion of Justice. Like I pronounced you're evaluating apples to oranges.

Answer 4

When Jesus said it, it was in the context of someone who was about to be stoned to death for sinning. It was a challenge to the individuals who were to do the stoning to only do it if they could truly take such a moral high ground. The premise being that actually we are all sinners and so none of us shoudl have the right to pass judgement. Linking back to the religious belief that it is God and God alone who has the right to judge us.

(By the way, I'm not some kind of religious zealot - I'm just explaining what the phrase meant.)

Answer 5

Not really. The ancient custom of stoning meant that a "first stone" would be thrown every time that a sentence was enforced. As a result, the first stone was an on-going experience that happened each time a person was condemned for their sins.

Answer 6

no. look at how people today stone women and men for adultery in Iran. If any of those people were forced to stop and look at their own lives and tell if they had not also committed some sin, they would refrain from holding themselves out as "holier" than anyone else. That is what is meant... don't judge others so harshly, since no one has led a perfect life. Jesus was asking people to be aware of their own sins, instead of judging others harshly, and penalizing them, when no one is perfect..

Answer 7

Actually, the Biblical account leaves out the important bit. Jesus found the crowd about to stone the woman, and said "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

All was silent for a few seconds, but then a large rock flew from the crowd and hit the woman between the eyes, killing her immediately.

And Jesus said: "Oh bloody hell, mother, you always have to go and spoil it."

(One for the Catholics there, I think.)

Answer 8

That means if you don't have anything wrong has been done, you can judge others who have done anything wrong. So don't judge anyone for doing a sin, unless you don't have any sin. Because if you also have sin, then how could you judge other people for doing something wrong or good when you also don't know and don't do what's good?

Sorry, my explanation is rather bad...

Answer 9

The literal meaning traces back to when people who were deemed with "fault" or "sin" and is in reference to violation of the norms of that particular society and were "executed" or "punished" or stoned (or lashed or crucified or gassed). It is still being done today. "Being not in the norm" caused the deaths of countless innocent.

The non-literal meaning refers to judgment made by people who are in no position to judge themselves. Everyday and everyone makes judgment of others in many ways.

It is meaningful. Had it been believed in, then hundreds even thousands of years of tragedy in human history would not have occurred.

Answer 10

I think you have taken it out of context, It really means that before anyone can condemn a person for an act or action they did, they should look inside themselves to see whether they have ever been guilty of the same crime. An example would be gossipping about another person, have they ever gossipped about another person? Have a great day.