# Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.
**URL:** https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991
**Category:** Religion and Spirituality
**Created:** [February 14, 2008, 4:06pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991 "2008-02-14T16:06:45Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@humegotitright](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/humegotitright)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 4:06pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/1 "2008-02-14T16:06:45Z")
‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
I mean if only God is fit to judge our actions, and that as we all have sin we shouldn’t judge others for their sins, then is the whole legal system not going against Christian beliefs?
What do you think? Is Jesus wrong in his statement? Are we wrong to enforce our notions of justice? Or is there no contradiction?
---
### Author:  [@anon](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/anon)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 5:11pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/2 "2008-02-14T17:11:48Z")
No contradiction. I always thought it was about judgementalness, not justice. Justice is pragmatic.
---
### Author:  [@Soldout](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Soldout)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 5:46pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/3 "2008-02-14T17:46:00Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
>
> If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
>
> I mean if only God is fit to judge our actions, and that as we all have sin we shouldn’t judge others for their sins, then is the whole legal system not going against Christian beliefs?
>
> What do you think? Is Jesus wrong in his statement? Are we wrong to enforce our notions of justice? Or is there no contradiction?
The Last time i checked adultery was not a crime. Jesus was obviously directing this statement to a religious Jews (priests, pharoses and scribes) who were judging this woman’s SIN (NOT crime) and yet they were not guiltless themselves. At this time in the Bible, Justice came from the Romans who governed over the Jews. The Romans would not have found this woman Guilty of any crime; however the religious society was condemning her sin.
So i don’t know why you chose this statement from Christ to pose your question because it clearly has nothing to do with the justice system (courts, prison or legal systems) but rather religious morality
.
---
### Author:  [@Anthem](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Anthem)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 6:46pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/4 "2008-02-14T18:46:56Z")
Let’s compare this quote with others that allow you to condemn your neighbors 🙂
---
### Author:  [@abowloforanges](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/abowloforanges)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 8:07pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/5 "2008-02-14T20:07:14Z")
> [@Soldout](#):
>
> The Last time i checked adultery was not a crime. Jesus was obviously directing this statement to a religious Jews (priests, pharoses and scribes) who were judging this woman’s SIN (NOT crime) and yet they were not guiltless themselves.
koifer may be able to correct me if i’m wrong here.
sin and crime were virtually synonymous to the jews. in fact, the religious jews were the judges of the people, were they not? so, in this context, adultery was a crime, and it was punishable by death.
---
### Author:  [@abowloforanges](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/abowloforanges)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 8:10pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/6 "2008-02-14T20:10:27Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
>
> If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
>
> I mean if only God is fit to judge our actions, and that as we all have sin we shouldn’t judge others for their sins, then is the whole legal system not going against Christian beliefs?
>
> What do you think? Is Jesus wrong in his statement? Are we wrong to enforce our notions of justice? Or is there no contradiction?
i think this question operates in much the same way as Anthem’s forgiveness thread. i don’t think that jesus meant that his followers should throw out the idea of justice completely. the point here isn’t “no one can judge another person” but rather, “be merciful, for you have sinned as well.” it’s a world-view and an attitude, not a law unto itself.
---
### Author:  [@Laurentius](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Laurentius)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 8:22pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/7 "2008-02-14T20:22:23Z")
> [@Soldout](#):
>
> > [@humegotitright](#):
> >
> > ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
> >
> > If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
> >
> > I mean if only God is fit to judge our actions, and that as we all have sin we shouldn’t judge others for their sins, then is the whole legal system not going against Christian beliefs?
> >
> > What do you think? Is Jesus wrong in his statement? Are we wrong to enforce our notions of justice? Or is there no contradiction?
>
> The Last time i checked adultery was not a crime. Jesus was obviously directing this statement to a religious Jews (priests, pharoses and scribes) who were judging this woman’s SIN (NOT crime) and yet they were not guiltless themselves.
I agree… Jesus did only speak of the religious aspect, not of the law.
Jesus wasn’t wary strict with rules, he told people that if necessarily and in emergencies, the should break the rule about working on the Sabbath.
---
### Author:  [@Anthem](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Anthem)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 8:24pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/8 "2008-02-14T20:24:44Z")
> [@abowloforanges](#):
>
> i think this question operates in much the same way as Anthem’s forgiveness thread. i don’t think that jesus meant that his followers should throw out the idea of justice completely. the point here isn’t “no one can judge another person” but rather, “be merciful, for you have sinned as well.” it’s a world-view and an attitude, not a law unto itself.
But we should stone gays.
True story.
---
### Author:  [@Soldout](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Soldout)
#### Post date: [February 14, 2008, 8:51pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/9 "2008-02-14T20:51:27Z")
> [@abowloforanges](#):
>
> > [@Soldout](#):
> >
> > The Last time i checked adultery was not a crime. Jesus was obviously directing this statement to a religious Jews (priests, pharoses and scribes) who were judging this woman’s SIN (NOT crime) and yet they were not guiltless themselves.
>
> koifer may be able to correct me if i’m wrong here.
>
> sin and crime were virtually synonymous to the jews. in fact, the religious jews were the judges of the people, were they not? so, in this context, adultery was a crime, and it was punishable by death.
Like i said before, during that time the Justice System only came from the Romans, Jews could not have their own “Justice system” only their “Religious laws”. That is why when the Religious Pharoses wanted to have Jesus executed, they had to prove he was a criminal to the Roman Justice system, thus they took Jesus to Pilot for him to do the sentencing. So the lesson Jesus is trying to teach us here is about mercy and has nothing to do with Justice systems, crime or prison systems, what he is saying is, do not “morally” Judge others for their sin because you also not pure and sinless. His statement was “let he that is without SIN cast the first stone” so obviously he was addressing moral and religious issues.
---
### Author:  [@raju](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/raju)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 4:13am UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/10 "2008-02-15T04:13:52Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
>
> If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
>
> I mean if only God is fit to judge our actions, and that as we all have sin we shouldn’t judge others for their sins, then is the whole legal system not going against Christian beliefs?
>
> What do you think? Is Jesus wrong in his statement? Are we wrong to enforce our notions of justice? Or is there no contradiction?
I look at that verse as something more poetic and metaphorical, but to the question at hand, I always felt that when all the religions talk about god being the only one able to judge a person, was based on the who would go to heaven and who wouldn’t. If a friend of mine committed adultery or stole (not as a need like to survive) something, I have every right to let him know that he committed a sin, all the holy books give us right and wrong actions, so why can’t someone judge another person.
About the prison and court system, that can be explained logically. If someone is going around committing a crime like murder, theft, rape (adultery of the worst kind), etc that is harming the collective good and is against the principles of the bible, then it should be up to the town/city/country to stop him/her, no? Murder is seen as a universal law that all societies abide by, not even cultural relativism can deny this, so it should of course have a public justice system that deals with the issue/s.
---
### Author:  [@Ned\_Flanders](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Ned_Flanders)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 1:23pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/11 "2008-02-15T13:23:32Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.’
>
> If we take this a true, then does it imply that Christians cannot justify courts, prisons, the whole legal system.
I think it indicates that Jesus teachings are not a good basis for generating a secular law.
In the same breath Jesus taught us not to murder and not to worry, with pretty much similar emphasis. When people try to generate a legal system based on Christian ethics it always runs into serious problems.
Jesus clearly taught an extremely high standard of moral behavior (don’t even think about adultery!), but he also clearly taught that this first required a renewal of man from the inside out, i.e. spiritual transformation. To expect Jesus’ standard of moral behavior without spiritual transformation just doesn’t work.
---
### Author:  [@Liteninbolt](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Liteninbolt)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 1:28pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/12 "2008-02-15T13:28:54Z")
“Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”
This scripture in the Bible says that what laws, taxes, etc. is the affair of the state. That if you live in a certain community, you must abide by the laws set forth by them. Conversely, the affairs of God are His in spiritual, ritual and property.
This of sorts was a notion of seperation of Church and state as stated by Jesus. Which I find appropriate in today’s standards.
---
### Author:  [@humegotitright](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/humegotitright)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 1:38pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/13 "2008-02-15T13:38:43Z")
> [@](#):
>
> I think it indicates that Jesus teachings are not a good basis for generating a secular law.
I agree. Is justice however not a direct decendent from Christian morality? Are the two not interconnected in some way?
> [@](#):
>
> That if you live in a certain community, you must abide by the laws set forth by them
Bit off topic, but I’ve always wondered if this argument would back up the theory that Jesus got what was coming to him, He deserved to die. I know He came to earth to die for us, so its not really that contraversial but people tend to view Pilate and those who cruxified Jesus as the ‘baddies’ when really they were just doing their job according to the law.
---
### Author:  [@Liteninbolt](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Liteninbolt)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 2:15pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/14 "2008-02-15T14:15:16Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > That if you live in a certain community, you must abide by the laws set forth by them
>
> Bit off topic, but I’ve always wondered if this argument would back up the theory that Jesus got what was coming to him, He deserved to die. I know He came to earth to die for us, so its not really that contraversial but people tend to view Pilate and those who cruxified Jesus as the ‘baddies’ when really they were just doing their job according to the law.
That one sentence you cite in itself may be off topic, but the whole of my first reply I feel is applicable to your OP.
Christians can justify the mandates set down by courts because if they live in a certain area, they must abide by those laws. If they find the laws incongruent to their beliefs due to their religious beliefs, then they would simply move to an area where their religious beliefs will not be in conflict. Such as in the Pilgrims sailing to the continent of America so they could worship as they seen fit.
If Christians live in a community with laws of a secular nature, they realize they are bound to them as anyone else. Christians aren’t an enclave within a sovereign nation. They are usually spread out amongst the community and are subject to the laws of the community. This is why I cited the scripture I did in my first post.
‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’ to me means we are all sinners and if we start throwing stones, we need to aim at ourselves. Hence, (I am paraphrasing) ‘how can we see the splinter in another’s eye, with the tree lodged in our own’. If a Christian stays in a community with certain laws, then those laws aren’t contradictory to their beliefs.
---
### Author:  [@Soldout](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Soldout)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 2:43pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/15 "2008-02-15T14:43:56Z")
> [@Liteninbolt](#):
>
> “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”
>
> This scripture in the Bible says that what laws, taxes, etc. is the affair of the state. That if you live in a certain community, you must abide by the laws set forth by them. Conversely, the affairs of God are His in spiritual, ritual and property.
> This of sorts was a notion of seperation of Church and state as stated by Jesus. Which I find appropriate in today’s standards.
Yes, The Bible even teaches us to respect authority. I think this topic is just a waist of time because Jesus was not even addressing the Justice System, crime and prison systems. He was just addressing judgmental religious folk.
---
### Author:  [@felix\_dakat](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/felix_dakat)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 3:04pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/16 "2008-02-15T15:04:17Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > I think it indicates that Jesus teachings are not a good basis for generating a secular law.
>
> I agree. Is justice however not a direct decendent from Christian morality? Are the two not interconnected in some way?
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > That if you live in a certain community, you must abide by the laws set forth by them
>
> Bit off topic, but I’ve always wondered if this argument would back up the theory that Jesus got what was coming to him, He deserved to die. I know He came to earth to die for us, so its not really that contraversial but people tend to view Pilate and those who cruxified Jesus as the ‘baddies’ when really they were just doing their job according to the law.
Only if your version of the Christian worldview is a one dimensional straw man.
---
### Author:  [@senoy](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/senoy)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 7:34pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/17 "2008-02-15T19:34:42Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> Bit off topic, but I’ve always wondered if this argument would back up the theory that Jesus got what was coming to him, He deserved to die. I know He came to earth to die for us, so its not really that contraversial but people tend to view Pilate and those who cruxified Jesus as the ‘baddies’ when really they were just doing their job according to the law.
Well, the crime he was convicted for was blasphemy by falsely claiming he was the Son of God. If he actually were the Son of God, he would not be guilty of blasphemy and should have been declared innocent. Thus, he was wrongly convicted and didn’t deserve to die. I think most Christians do not particularly view Pilate as a bad guy, but as someone caught up in events beyond his control. The religious leaders of the time are more frequently considered the “bad guys,” if anyone. Most likely because they were the ones most qualified to recognize the divinity of Christ, were shown ample evidence of such and chose to execute him anyway in order to preserve their own status.
As for the justice system, I’m not willing to make the claim that the justice system is Christian. I, for one, do have issues reconciling forgiveness with the concept of a mortal judge. I’m not willing to judge those that do work within the system, but I don’t believe that I could do it.
---
### Author:  [@Ned\_Flanders](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Ned_Flanders)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 8:21pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/18 "2008-02-15T20:21:32Z")
> [@humegotitright](#):
>
> I agree. Is justice however not a direct decendent from Christian morality? Are the two not interconnected in some way?
For sure, one can make a case for civil law based on certain aspects of Christianity. But everyone ends up picking and choosing different things. "Lets follow the golden rule to do unto others etc… , but let’s forget the Jesus’ comments on getting rich…, let’s help our poor neighbor…, but let’s not turn the other cheek if someone attacks etc…
It becomes a case of simply using certain Christian values for a secular end, which isn’t really a problem if everyone likes them.
The problem becomes when you apply certain aspects of Christian morality to non-Christians. One day the non-Christian says, “hey wait a minute…!”. For example, why should a gay man not receive exactly equal treatment as any other US citizen, particularly if he has absolutely no interest in the Christian prohibition against homosexuality?
Christian morality is primarily for Christians. If other people like it too, then fine. But let’s not force anyone to follow Jesus. Secular laws should be defined by society, not the church.
---
### Author:  [@tentative](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/tentative)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 9:03pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/19 "2008-02-15T21:03:54Z")
Ned,
> [@](#):
>
> Christian morality is primarily for Christians. If other people like it too, then fine. But let’s not force anyone to follow Jesus. Secular laws should be defined by society, not the church.
Agreed. But what does one do with the current polarizing issues such as gay marraige, abortion rights, teaching creationism in schools, stem cell research, etc.? It would seem that at least in the U.S., the tail is attempting to wag the dog…
---
### Author:  [@Ned\_Flanders](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Ned_Flanders)
#### Post date: [February 15, 2008, 11:27pm UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991/20 "2008-02-15T23:27:25Z")
> [@tentative](#):
>
> Agreed. But what does one do with the current polarizing issues such as gay marraige, abortion rights, teaching creationism in schools, stem cell research, etc.? It would seem that at least in the U.S., the tail is attempting to wag the dog…
I think Christians are scared. Scared that someone is going to take away all the things they value highly. They see US society changing and becoming less inclined to follow or even pay lip service to Christian ethics. The don’t want to accept this change and have to deal with a more complex and pluralistic society. They are scared for their kids, that they will end up losing their faith in this dark new world.
Then, along comes a highly organized political camp who realize that playing on these fears can help them achieve their political (and largely secular) agenda. So, the Christian world becomes heavily politicized and the only prominent social issues are the ones that are promoted by the right wing political camp.
The anger and close-mindedness that you have no doubt observed in the Christian community has it’s roots in fear. It might not seem that way when they are standing at an intersection holding placards, but that’s where it originates. They key to stopping it is to encourage Christians to re-engage fully in US civil life and stop this desire to hide away in the Christian ghetto. We need to stop having church pot-lucks, and start having community pot-lucks.
To be quite honest about it, I blame Christians and the democratic party for this mess. I blame Christians for being so gullible that they believe issues like preventing gun control and having lower taxes are somehow the issues that Jesus would have us care about. And I blame the democratic party for largely abandoning the Christian voting block to the republicans.
Where are the democrats who are willing to talk in religious language about giving to the poor, pacifism, and serving our neighbors? They don’t exist! Democrats need to find a moderate and unashamedly religious champion who will provide some balance to the right wing Christian block, who largely have the Christian world all to themselves…
[Next page](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/let-he-who-is-without-sin-cast-the-first-stone/19991.md?page=2)