# Jesus and the woman taken in adultry: Where was the guy??? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 7, 2014, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033 "2014-08-07T14:19:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/61 "2014-08-08T18:23:05Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > I have a hunch that if I persistently bet against your hunches, I’d make money on the deal. But that’s just a hunch, not a reasoned criticism of your point of view. > > Paul (not Saul) stoned people when again? Remember, we’re talking about Saul/Paul pre-conversion. The man who persecuted Christians. ---
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/62 "2014-08-08T19:02:52Z")
Paul was a bit of a party-pooper. The old “those that protest too much …”. I blame the lack of [del] porn [/del] internet back then. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/63 "2014-08-08T21:29:28Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Remember, we’re talking about Saul/Paul pre-conversion. The man who persecuted Christians. “We”? I thought “we” were talking about Paul and what he wrote in his Epistles and how he hated sex and all forms of pleasure :dubious: - after his conversion. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/64 "2014-08-08T21:35:24Z")
> [@Malacandra](#): > > “We”? I thought “we” were talking about Paul and what he wrote in his Epistles and how he hated sex and all forms of pleasure :dubious: - after his conversion. But the verse quoted something that supposedly happened while Jesus was still alive…back before Saul became Paul. ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/65 "2014-08-08T21:46:03Z")
Also, Post #50 once again. The Paul hated all sorts of sex and pleasure is not exactly a warranted critique. In addition, some of the stuff that folks blame Paul for are either normal or highly progressive for the era he’s living under. I mean, for one, do we actually think that women could speak in Temple? (or were even allowed to be there) And there is some discussion that Paul’s words about the women speaking are specific to that instance. Some speculate that it refers to certain disruptive women. We run into issues at times in trying to translate Koine Greek into modern day English. Certain things may get lost in translation and we would be careful to consider that (especially when you consider Paul speaks very highly of women in high positions of the early Church - Junia, Priscilla, etc). ---
**Author:** ![ISiddiqui](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/97f17d/32.png) [@ISiddiqui](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ISiddiqui)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/66 "2014-08-08T21:49:33Z")
Here is an interesting treatment (which you may or may not find convincing) about when Paul was speaking of women being silent in church, it was a temporary silence referring to disruptions in the Church in Corinth, not a general proscription: [http://www.gci.org/church/ministry/women9](http://www.gci.org/church/ministry/women9) Also, it’d be good to remember that Paul is writing letters BACK to churches. We don’t know what the churches are writing to Paul about and therefore we don’t know exactly what Paul is responding to. ---
**Author:** ![RivkahChaya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rivkahchaya/32/8919_2.png) [@RivkahChaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RivkahChaya)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 10:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/67 "2014-08-08T22:09:05Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > AFAIK, the Bible nowhere acknowledges that girl-girl is a thing that ever happens. There is a passage which I can’t find right now, but I sent out a couple of emails to some better-versed friends, so I hope to locate it soon, that instructs a man with multiple wives that if two of his wives are sisters, he can’t have sex with the two sisters at the same time. This leads one to the obvious conclusion that in a polygamous situation, three-ways are fine, as long as the two women are NOT related. There are no other special instructions, like, the women are to refrain from touching each other, but if they touch accidentally, it’s OK, or anything, so again, we can presume that a three-way is pretty much whatever floats your boat. As long as no seed is spilt, so I guess masturbating while watching the women together is out. As far as “where is the man?” He isn’t necessary to the story. The story is more poignant with just the woman. The man isn’t necessary. Maybe he was brought to the stoning block next, and Jesus says “Sheesh, did you guys totally miss the point?” but that would be anti-climactic. Or maybe they had just finished stoning him, and then brought the woman up, in which case, it sounds like Jesus was a little late to the party, which takes off some of the shine, if you’ll forgive me mixing metaphors. Or else, Jesus stood by, watched them stone the man, and then stepped forward to save the woman, which is a mixed message, at best. It’s probably a completely invented story, and works best the way it is, but even if it is based on a real occurrence, the author has selected the details that best convey the message. Moreover, this is another example (albeit, most of the others are in the synoptics), where the Pharisees come to Jesus with some sort of question that suggests a very law-&-order, Rabbi Shammai-type answer, and instead, Jesus gives a Rabbi Hillel answer. Hillel once said (in Pirkei Avot 2:4) “Pass not judgment upon thy neighbor until thou hast put thyself in his place.” Jesus also cribbed “Do unto others, etc.” from Hillel, and the bit about the two greatest laws. Shammai & Hillel were the sort of bad-cop/good-cop of very, very early rabbinicalism, before it was even called that. Shammai was a strict constructionist, who was more interested in the literal meaning of the Torah, while Hillel always had a kinder, gentler interpretation. There’s even a story where HaShem himself supposedly came down upon a group of rabbis who were arguing over whether Shammai or Hillel was correct about something. HaShem said “Shammai is correct. Do what Hillel says anyway.” Jesus is very Hillel-y. ---
**Author:** ![Rucksinator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/898d66/32.png) [@Rucksinator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rucksinator)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/68 "2014-08-08T23:00:04Z")
> [@RivkahChaya](#): > > There is a passage which I can’t find right now, but I sent out a couple of emails to some better-versed friends, so I hope to locate it soon, that instructs a man with multiple wives that if two of his wives are sisters, he can’t have sex with the two sisters at the same time. This leads one to the obvious conclusion that in a polygamous situation, three-ways are fine, as long as the two women are NOT related. There are no other special instructions, like, the women are to refrain from touching each other, but if they touch accidentally, it’s OK, or anything, so again, we can presume that a three-way is pretty much whatever floats your boat. As long as no seed is spilt, so I guess masturbating while watching the women together is out. > > As far as “where is the man?” He isn’t necessary to the story. The story is more poignant with just the woman. The man isn’t necessary. Maybe he was brought to the stoning block next, and Jesus says “Sheesh, did you guys totally miss the point?” but that would be anti-climactic. Or maybe they had just finished stoning him, and then brought the woman up, in which case, it sounds like Jesus was a little late to the party, which takes off some of the shine, if you’ll forgive me mixing metaphors. Or else, Jesus stood by, watched them stone the man, and then stepped forward to save the woman, which is a mixed message, at best. > > It’s probably a completely invented story, and works best the way it is, but even if it is based on a real occurrence, the author has selected the details that best convey the message. > > Moreover, this is another example (albeit, most of the others are in the synoptics), where the Pharisees come to Jesus with some sort of question that suggests a very law-&-order, Rabbi Shammai-type answer, and instead, Jesus gives a Rabbi Hillel answer. Hillel once said (in Pirkei Avot 2:4) “Pass not judgment upon thy neighbor until thou hast put thyself in his place.” Jesus also cribbed “Do unto others, etc.” from Hillel, and the bit about the two greatest laws. > > Shammai & Hillel were the sort of bad-cop/good-cop of very, very early rabbinicalism, before it was even called that. Shammai was a strict constructionist, who was more interested in the literal meaning of the Torah, while Hillel always had a kinder, gentler interpretation. There’s even a story where HaShem himself supposedly came down upon a group of rabbis who were arguing over whether Shammai or Hillel was correct about something. HaShem said “Shammai is correct. Do what Hillel says anyway.” Jesus is very Hillel-y. And on a barely related note: Even though I’m not Catholic (or even Christian) I really like this new pope. And I agree that Jesus was very Hillel-y. I don’t know exactly where the Phelps family gets their theology from, but it’s certainly not from Jesus. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2014, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033/69 "2014-08-08T23:21:25Z")
> [@Rucksinator](#): > > I don’t know exactly where the Phelps family gets their theology from, but it’s certainly not from Jesus. They call themselves “Baptists” but [their theology is Calvinist](http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fred_Phelps#Theological_views): > [@](#): > > The theology of the WBC is an extreme variant of Calvinism. According to their beliefs: > > - Man is in a state of sin, and can only be saved by the grace of God. > - This grace is not given freely to all, but only to God’s “elect” > - The elect are the people whom God has foreordained to salvation. All others are reprobates, who have been created for the express purpose of being sent to Hell. This is the Calvinist belief of unconditional election, a.k.a. “double predestination,” which is a form of determinism; it explains why the Westboro Baptist Church protests aren’t about proselytizing. The intent of their protests is to thank God for smiting us. > - Those whom God chooses to condemn, he causes to sin by “hardening their hearts” against himself. > - It is the duty of the elect to proclaim God’s word (even though God will not cause the reprobates to listen). Their goal is not to win converts, or to “save” others, but simply to rebuke others for their sins. > - No human being can say who is among the elect but those outside the WBC are certainly damned. [23] > - All events on earth happen because of God’s will. This includes natural disasters and actions committed by people. Events such as Hurricane Katrina, the September 11th attacks on New York and the financial recession of 2008-09 are therefore celebrated by the WBC as God’s righteous destruction of reprobates.[27] > - It is also the duty of the elect to praise and thank God for all such judgments. This is why the Phelps family is often seen with signs reading “Thank God for 9/11” and “Thank God for Dead Soldiers”. They offered similar thanks for the recent $11 million judgment against them, because they see it as proof that God is hardening the hearts of men against them. > - WBC members told Rebecca Barrett-Fox many times the Second Coming of Jesus would happen during the life time of Fred Phelps. [23] > > Their obsession with homosexuality appears to be the result of the widespread acceptance of homosexuality in the world. For the members of the WBC, all sins separate man from God, and they do not claim that the elect are without sin. However, according to their beliefs, people must sincerely repent of their sins before they can be forgiven. For the members of the WBC, “gay pride” and the acceptance of homosexuality is tantamount to having “murderer pride” or thinking of child rape as being just another, equally valid form of sexual expression. Anyone who doesn’t condemn homosexuality as evil is, according to the WBC, a “fag enabler”, and deserving of divine retribution. Fred Phelps got emotional and refused to talk further to anyone who asked if he personally had homosexual inclinations. [28] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jesus-and-the-woman-taken-in-adultry-where-was-the-guy/695033.md?page=3)