Why this story matters

(Numbers 15:32-36)

(Page 2 of 2)

Not so strange bedfellows

Until it was deposed, the Taliban government of Afghanistan stressed the need for moral cohesion. It used stoning as a deterrent to breaking certain moral prohibitions. The belief was that the breakdown of society was at stake. In 1997 the New York Times told the story of an Afghan woman, Jamila, who was stoned to death for the sin of adultery. Adultery is surely at least as serious a moral offense us picking up sticks on the Sabbath. And it's an offense that was certainly more likely to impact the moral cohesion of that society if it was not punished severely. Like it or not, the justification is the same. In fact, the Bible explicitly called for the death penalty for adultery: “If a man is found sleeping with another man's wife, both the man who slept with her and the woman must die” (Deuteronomy 22:22).  A Christian who defends Yahweh's decision to have this man stoned to death based on the need for cohesion within that society is in no position to condemn an Islamist government when it does the same thing for the same reason. And what if an Islamist government decrees that gay people should be stoned to death, as the Taliban did? If the Taliban were to defend this based on the need for moral cohesion in its society, then on what grounds can a Christian who defends Yahweh's actions, criticize the Islamist government? They don't have a leg to stand on.

Stoning

There’s a reason stoning is chosen as punishment by certain people. It is meant to instill fear. It works because it is brutal. The victim does not die quickly. The time it takes depends on a number of factors and it has been documented to take up to half an hour. The head is pelted continuously until it's a bloody mess and the face is mutilated and disfigured beyond recognition. In a paper comparing the stoning laws of Judaism and Islam, law professor Sanaz Alasti noted that some cultures abandoned stoning in favor of more “humane” punishments like beheading (Justice Policy Journal, volume 4 -no.1, spring 2007). Amnesty International has been monitoring these kinds of punishments for some time. In its January 2008 report, Iran: End executions by stoning, it refers to stoning as, “the ultimate form of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment." It describes stoning as a “particularly grotesque and horrific practice” that is “specifically designed to increase the suffering of victims.”

Whatever God does is good...trust me 

And this is where the apologist’s defense fails once again. Stoning someone to death for picking up sticks on the wrong day is unnecessary and excessive, no matter how you try to justify it. The man could have been punished swiftly without resort to unnecessary cruelty. The article in Apologetics Press exposes this unwittingly. Mr. Butt is conspicuously unable to demonstrate that society would have broken down if a less cruel punishment had been used. Therefore, he brings out the old ruse that whatever Yahweh says is right because he's God and that's that: “The Bible says that God knows 'all things'…and only God has the prerogative of determining the proper punishment for disobedience.” Of course, any Islamist government could say the same thing about the authority of their god. And if they believe their god tells them to stone adulterers and gay people to death, then this must be right because, according to Kyle Butt, God has the prerogative of determining the proper punishment.

 

Conclusion

There are lots of humane punishments available that would have been effective deterrents. One example is even offered in the same chapter as this story, and it's specifically regarding people who commit "presumptuous sins". The recommended punishment is banishment: “But if one of you does wrong on purpose, whether Israelite or foreigner, you have sinned against me by disobeying my laws. You will be sent away and will no longer live among the people of Israel” (15:30 CEV). So despite all the inflammatory rhetoric of apologists, there are better alternatives. Surely an omniscient deity would be able to come up with effective punishments that weren't cruel, grotesque, and designed to increase the suffering of the victim. Apparently, though, this simple task is too much to ask of Yahweh.



 

© IllustratedBibleStories.ca