This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bible, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Bible on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BibleWikipedia:WikiProject BibleTemplate:WikiProject BibleBible articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Judaism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Judaism-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JudaismWikipedia:WikiProject JudaismTemplate:WikiProject JudaismJudaism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities articles
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Law Enforcement. Please Join, Create, and Assess.Law EnforcementWikipedia:WikiProject Law EnforcementTemplate:WikiProject Law EnforcementLaw enforcement articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion articles
Capital punishment in the Bible is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islam, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Islam-related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.IslamWikipedia:WikiProject IslamTemplate:WikiProject IslamIslam-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Religious textsWikipedia:WikiProject Religious textsTemplate:WikiProject Religious textsReligious texts articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Theology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Theology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TheologyWikipedia:WikiProject TheologyTemplate:WikiProject TheologyTheology articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
@Fayenatic london: Hello! I expect you are new enough to Wikipedia not to realize this page is in violation of several of Wikipedia's requirements.Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not What you have here is called primary sourcing (the Bible references), which makes this original work--your views--and that is forbidden.[1] All sourcing must be supported by quality secondary sources, but especially primary sources like Bible quotes must be backed up by verifiable secondary sources[2] because in the Bible area, there is a lot of regular controversy. Books that cover Jewish law, the death penalty, Jewish ethics, etc. are the kind of thing you need here. Google books is a good place to begin. [3] You also can't just present one side of a controversial topic.[4] It is a Wikipedia requirement that you demonstrate neutrality.[5] Without secondary sources and a neutral pov, this page will be deleted by someone in a relatively short time. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia remember--not a soapbox for individual opinions.[6] There is a pretty steep learning curve on Wikipedia, so don't take any of this personally. None of this is stuff the ordinary person knows before attempting to edit Wikipedia. Some reading will help with all this. [7] I am willing to help with some of the work here if you want help finding those sources. I won't collapse or delete this page--but I guarantee someone else will come along and do exactly that if it isn't cleaned up soon. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:16, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oct13 I recommend replacing the designations 'Jewish' and 'Christian' with something more neutral and less subject to disagreement over definition. Old Testament views will be interpreted by both Jewish and Christian theologians and ethicists remember, but it is not necessary to designate them as such. What you are looking for are the majority views. What do most scholars who study this subject say about it? Include all the views, including atheist, agnostic, whatever, in sections such as historical views, sociological views, theological views etc. It will have to be divided by section since it can't be divided by topic--as there is only one topic. :-) Scholars may not fully agree with your own interpretation. Do not slant things to represent your views. You are compiling what the scholars say only. Good luck and if you need any help, I am only a ping away. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:18, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This article isn't my opinion. It's not my opinion, for example, that God tells man what he tells man; it's a quote. I don't agree with Rashi, as another example. Indeed I didn't include any of my opinions in this article, save for what the Catholic Church's position on the death penalty is under Christian perspectives; but I only included various Christians' perspectives - not just my church's - as secondary sources. That said, Michael Barber is a scholar and I cited him under the section Woman caught in adultery. I'll look for more biblical scholars to cite.
I accept all that you say as you say it, but when you use original sources it communicates as an opinion whether you intend it or not. That's why Wiki has that rule. I have not researched this topic--but I can tell you that even a direct quote from the Bible will end up interpreted multiple ways. It's what keeps the theologians in business. I will leave you to it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 22:26, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is the main issue: everyone could pick their favorite verses about violence or death while not acknowledging others, and vice-versa. This is commonly called cherry-picking or quote-mining, and is not necessarily made with bad intent, but is subject to common issues like confirmation bias. This is why it's good to start using a scholarly tertiary source and to then pick the examples pointed out by that source. Something that is also within the scope of this article is justification of power and justice enforcement (in some cases justifying murder by humans), etc. For this latter topic, the primary biblical sources are not very useful, but there are plenty of scholarly sources considered reliable which could be used. This article is also closely related to Violence in the Bible and merging the two is also an eventual possibility (or splitting part of the other article and placing it here, etc), although such reorganization may possibly be hasty at this point, as the article is so new. —PaleoNeonate – 23:21, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The two editors above are correct, the best sources for a WP-article on this topic are academic publications about "Death penalty in the Bible". Don't confuse it with "Christian/Jewish approach to death penalty", a different but related topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That said, I do think we should have an article on this topic. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:59, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Oct13: Now that you have your list of scriptures, this article needs expanding with at least three things: it needs the addition of the Near Eastern context, and what laws of other nations surrounding Israel were like in the same era, including how Christianity has both practiced and protested the death penalty; it needs a theology/ethics section and a discussion of all the various theological/ethical views--both then and now--because, as I said above, there are always multiple interpretations of the Bible texts; and it is in need of a sociology section. I might also include a history section. There is not a monolithic view of this highly controversial topic and presenting it as though there is, or ever was, is incorrect. If you would rather not, I will come back and do some work on it when I have finished what I am doing now. Jenhawk777 21:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
God with a capital G means the God of the Bible. Indeed Israel, who wrote the OT, only believes in one God and give him many names: YHWH, Elohim, the Lord, etc. So you don't need to specify which God.
Oct13 (talk) 21:56, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on the issues of primary sourcing that are being discussed. I'm just wondering why the article doesn't discuss homosexuality, given Leviticus 20:13 -- "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." See The Bible and Homosexuality.Kirkpete (talk) 15:58, 4 September 2019 (UTC) KirkPete[reply]
I see no reason not to include this, but use good secondary sources. University-press texts on this shouldn't be hard to find. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:11, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, agree. And to be clear: it's not about women (lesbians). Maimonides discussed whether there was worldly biblical law against lesbians, and he agreed that lesbians could be slapped for indecency, but no legal punishment was provided by Scripture. Tgeorgescu (talk) 19:15, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Leviticus 18:3 has been read as a prohibition against lesbianism (and, I think, something in NT), but it doesn't mention any specific punishment, so off-topic for this article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:29, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Technically, yes, in Judaism lesbianism is considered a form of lewdness, so it is formally prohibited, but not serious enough to disqualify a woman from marrying a priest (unlike rape, divorce or widowhood). If I'm not wrong, sperm in vain is considered in Judaism as more wicked than lesbianism. Tgeorgescu (talk) 20:04, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Death penalty for homosexuality which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 22:17, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The sources used are indeed unreliable. it did not belong to the original scripts is also inaccurate: there are no extant 'original scripts' of the Gospel of John, and scholarly judgement is necessarily based upon later copies. I'm not entirely sure whether it's off-topic though to briefly mention the disputed or uncertain authenticity of the pericope adulterae. Maybe some source can be culled from Jesus and the woman taken in adultery, to back up something like "In a passage whose authenticity is uncertain, John 8:3-11 mentions [...]"? ☿ Apaugasma (talk☉) 19:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming there is a decent source, but I would suggest more like "provenance is debated". However, it's still off-topic to me, since that applies to the whole gospel, and probably other bible-texts as well. This is where bible-scholars make their daily bread. The article is "Capital punishment in the Bible", and even if some (Christian) bibles have it with an *, they still have it. I vaguely remember a Conservapedia project for making a bible without bits like this. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, "provenance is debated" would indeed apply to the whole gospel (and by extension, most of the Bible), but "inauthentic" is narrower, meaning added by someone other than the author(s) of the Johannine literature, whoever those were. If the passage indeed stems from c. 300 CE, it would fall well without the sphere of New Testamental authorship. I see no reason why we should not include a small pointer to this: is it not instructive to note that this well-known biblical perspective on capital punishment may in fact date from a period two centuries after the redaction of the Bible? I know I'm glad I learned this today. ☿ Apaugasma (talk☉) 20:35, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
IMO, no, it doesn't fit here. Consider the current full article-text on this: John 8:3-11 mentions a woman caught in adultery being brought to Jesus for judgment.[46] Jesus does not condemn her, but says "Go and from now on do not sin any more." (John 8:11) Although the authenticity of the story is doubted as it did not belong to the original scripts.[47][48][49] That is a weird WP:PROPORTION. I'd find a WP:EXPLNOTE like "On the authourship on this passage, see Jesus_and_the_woman_taken_in_adultery#Authorship" less objectionable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This may be my personal interpretation, but "inauthentic" reads like "not proper religion" in WP-voice. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:56, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, of course the current text is entirely out of proportion. My proposal is to remove the entire latter part that was added by the IP, and to just prefix it with a brief qualifying subordinate clause. Also, "authenticity" is indeed a bit ambiguous. It's been a while since I last dealt with textual criticism, but the correct term for this is of course "interpolation". I propose:
In a passage that may be a later interpolation,[1] John 8:3–11 mentions a woman caught in adultery being brought to Jesus for judgment.[2] Jesus does not condemn her, but says "Go and from now on do not sin any more." (John 8:11)
According to Cross & Livingstone 1997, these verses [...] are certainly not part of the original text of St John's Gospel. They also note that On the other hand, the story is very much in line with many of those of the Synoptic Gospels, and the facts that it is definitely referred to in a passage in the 3rd cent. Didascalia Apostolorum [...] point to its primitiveness. Finally, they report that there has been in the scholarly literature a suggestion that the passage belongs to St Luke. It's of course complex, but "may be a later interpolation" seems fair on the basis of this source.
It is very common in scholarly sources to point out that a passage is a later interpolation when discussing its contents. It's relevant both from a historical and from a theological point of view. ☿ Apaugasma (talk☉) 21:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Apaugasma And at some point, we may go looking for a source that talks about this passage in relation to capital punishment ;-) But that is an article-wide issue. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:16, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you're right of course. The article is generally very poor, and I'm finding myself in a repeated pattern of making a big fuss over small details in articles that are a complete mess anyways (most of the articles I deal with are much worse than this one). I really need to stop doing this, yet I'm not quite sure how. ☿ Apaugasma (talk☉) 14:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Well, enough mole-hills and we'll get a mountain. I'd like to protest that I'd never do that, but this thread would call me a big fat liar. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:36, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
References
^Although it was probably not part of the original Johannine text, it may derive from other early gospel texts. It dates to no later than the 3rd century CE; see Cross, F. L.; Livingstone, E. A. (1997). "Pericope adulterae". The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church (3rd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. p. 1256. ISBN0-19-211655-X.
^USCCB Bible John 8:3-11 Then the scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery and made her stand in the middle. They said to him, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the very act of committing adultery. Now in the law, Moses commanded us to stone such women.* So what do you say?" They said this to test him, so that they could have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and began to write on the ground with his finger. But when they continued asking him, he straightened up and said to them, "Let the one among you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at her." Again he bent down and wrote on the ground. And in response, they went away one by one, beginning with the elders. So he was left alone with the woman before him. Then Jesus straightened up and said to her, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" She replied, "No one, sir." Then Jesus said, "Neither do I condemn you. Go, [and] from now on do not sin any more."
—PaleoNeonate – 03:20, 3 August 2018 (UTC)