… shouldn’t throw stones - or in a biblical representation, let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
If I have a valid critical argument to make against someone or something, why should I be required to be flawless to make it? Aren’t ideas like these simply ad hominem?
and of what were they “convicted”? Under the old law, the full statement is thus:
But where was the man? The woman was not merely accused of adultery, she was caught in the very act of adultery. The law specified that BOTH of them were to be put to death. Why was the man involved not killed? Perhaps this is why the men who wanted to kill her were “convicted by their own conscience”. Coverup? Blame the woman for everything. Put her out in front to take the fall for the connected and important man. Let her be pilloried while he gets off scot-free. Sound familiar?