Since stoning to death is imposed in some Islamic countries, it is worthwhile to find out what Jewish, Christian and Islamic traditions say about this practice.

The Law of Moses states that male and female adulterers are to be put to death (Deuteronomy 23:22). If a betrothed woman was attacked in the town, she was held responsible because she did not call for help (Deuteronomy 22:23-24). If the offence occurred in the open country, the woman was not to be punished; it was accepted that there was no one to hear her cries.

If this seems arbitrary, the punishment for a man who raped a virgin is even more questionable. He was to pay a substantial fine, and was required to marry the woman, without any right to for him to divorce her (Deuteronomy 22:28-29).

The opinion of the rape victim about this arrangement is not recorded.

However, this is not all that the Jewish Scriptures tell us about adultery and its punishment. Take the case of Tamar (Genesis Ch 38).

Tamar was the daughter-in law of Judah, one of the sons of Israel. She was married to Er, the eldest of Judah’s three sons (Genesis Ch 38:6) but Er offended Yahweh, and Yahweh killed him. (Genesis 38:7) It was then the duty of Onan, the next brother, to beget children by Tamar in Er’s name.

But Onan, knowing that the line would not count as his, spilt his seed on the ground every time he slept with his brother’s wife, to avoid providing offspring for his brother. What he did was offensive to Yahweh, who killed him too. (Genesis 38:9-10, New Jerusalem Bible)

Judah sent Tamar home. He said it was to wait until his youngest son grew up, but actually it was to keep her away from the boy. Time passed. Judah’s own wife died and after the mourning period he had business near where Tamar lived. When she found this out she disguised herself as a prostitute and waited on the road. Judah saw her, offered to pay her a kid from the flock to have sex with her and gave her his seal, cord and staff as a surety. However, when Judah later sent a friend to pay the woman he couldn’t find her and no one knew of a prostitute who plied her trade in those parts.

‘Let her keep the things,’ Judah said, ‘or we shall become a laughing-stock. At least I sent her this kid, even though you did not find her.’ (Gen 38:23 NJB)

About three months later, Tamar’s pregnancy was revealed:

‘Your daughter-in-law, Tamar has played the harlot; moreover, she is pregnant as a result of whoredom. ‘ And Judah said, ‘Bring her out, and let her be burnt.’ As she was being brought out, she sent word to her father-in-law, ‘It was the owner of these who made me pregnant. And she said, ‘Take note, please, whose these are, the signet, the cord and the staff.’ (Genesis 38:25, New Revised Standard Version).

Tamar had put her life in Judah’s hand. It was a huge risk. Judah and his brothers had slaughtered all the men of Shechem and enslaved all the women and children because one townsman had ravished their sister (Genesis ch 34). They sold their brother Joseph into slavery (Genesis 37: 26-27 and would have killed him, if Judah had not suggested enslavement instead. How would such a man react to this revelation?

Again, Judah preserved life. He said:

She is more right than I, since I did not give her to my son Shelah. (Genesis 38:26 NRSV)

Judah saved both Tamar’s life and the life that she was carrying. He accepted responsibility for the pregnancy and did not blame Tamar. Indeed, he acknowledged that she was more in the right than he was because he had failed to do his duty under the law of inheritance. As for the requirement to burn her to death, it fell away completely.

The law to put adulterers to death wasn’t applied to David or Bathsheba. David saw Bathsheba bathing from the palace rooftop, found out who she was, sent for her. She became pregnant. At first, David tried to cover this up by bringing her husband from the army where he was serving, and giving him leave to be with his wife. The man refused to take time off so David let him return to his unit, but gave orders to the Commander that he was to be killed in the fighting. The deed was done; Bathsheba was widowed and after the period of mourning, David married her (2 Samuel Ch. 11).

The prophet Nathan went to David and told him a story of a poor man who had just one little ewe lamb, and a rich man who took it.

David flew into a great rage with the man. ‘As Yahweh lives,’ he said to Nathan ‘the man who did this deserves to die. For doing such a thing and for having shown no pity, he shall make fourfold restitution for the lamb.’

Nathan then said to David, ‘You are the man. Yahweh, God of Israel, says this, "I anointed you king of Israel. I saved you from Saul’s clutches, I gave you your master’s household and your master’s wive s into your arms, I gave you the House of Israel and the House of Judah; and, if this is still too little, I shall give you other things as well. Why did you show contempt for Yahweh, by doing what displeases him? You put Uriah the Hittite to the sword, you took his wife to be your wife, causing his death by the sword of the Ammonites. For this, your household will never be free of the sword, since you showed contempt for me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite, to make her your wife.

‘Yahweh says this, "Out of your own household I shall raise misfortune for you. Before your very eyes I shall take your wives and give them to your neighbour, who will lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have worked in secret, but I shall work this for all Israel to see, in broad daylight."’ (2 Samuel 12:5-12, New Jerusalem Bible)

This blistering attack prompted a mea culpa from David:

‘I have sinned against Yahweh.’ Nathan then said to David, ‘Yahweh, for his part, forgives your sin; you are not to die. But since you have outraged Yahweh by doing this, the child born to you will die. And Nathan went home’ (2 Samuel 12:13-15, New Jerusalem Bible).

After this broadside to the king it is no wonder that Nathan left immediately.

David’s actions left Talmudic commentators with a problem. The moral lapses are obvious but was it adultery? The sages said no. According to Rabbi Aaron Perry,

So there!

Nevertheless, like Judah, David took full responsibility for his actions. The Biblical narrative stressed the moral failure of David, not Bathsheba. Similarly, in the warning about adultery to young men in Proverbs, the teaching is directed towards the man (Proverbs 6:20-7:27). So despite the death penalty for adultery in the Torah, there are other approaches in the Jewish tradition. Take the prophet Hosea:

I will not punish your daughters when they play the whore,

nor your daughters-in-law when they commit adultery;

For the men themselves go aside with whores,

and sacrifice with temple prostitutes;

thus a people without understanding comes to ruin.

(Hosea 4:14, New RSV)

This shows how the idea of judging sexual morality for both sexes equally was undermining the idea of punishing women harshly. This was further developed in the New Testament.

In Matthew’s Gospel, Joseph faced a delicate situation:

When ,,, Mary had been engaged to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found to be with child… (Matthew 1:18-19, New RSV)

The gospel tells us that this was by the Holy Spirit, though Joseph did not know this.

Her husband Joseph, being a righteous man and unwilling to expose her to public disgrace, planned to dismiss her quietly. But just when he had resolved to do this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him…. (Matthew 1:19-20, NRSV)

The gospel assumes that a decent man would not invoke the severity of the law or exposure of a woman to social disgrace. Jesus was to display the same sensitivity to women who had broken the moral code.

Jesus was known as a friend of sinners (Matthew 11:19, Luke 7:34). When a sinful woman came to Jesus it says that he forgave her sins (Luke 7:36-50). Jesus astonished a Samaritan woman (John 4:12) and his own disciples (John 4:27) by speaking to her. He did not turn away from this woman because of her unconventional sexual history (John 4:16-18).

The Jews in Mohammed’s time had modified the strictures of the Mosaic Law, abandoning the death penalty for a naming and shaming ritual. However, Mohammed insisted on the older punishment:

I don’t know if the story of the woman taken in adultery was known to Mohammed but the similarities and the differences between it and the accounts of Mohammed’s dealings with adulterous women are striking:

Would the woman have come to Mohammed and confessed her sin if she knew was going to be stoned to death? If she had heard of Jesus she might have hoped or even expected that her life would have been spared. The story could be read as a cruel confidence trick, lulling the woman into a false sense of security and then executing her when the child had been weaned and provided for.

A second account is more detailed:

I find this account even more troubling. The woman does not choose the guardian for the child. Her execution is described in gory detail, including the abuse that was heaped on her. The most striking contrast between Mohammed and Jesus is in their attitude towards the woman and the law. Mohammed recognised the woman’s repentance and prayed for her soul but he still had her killed. Jesus saved a woman’s life, turning the accusation of immorality back on her accusers, but demanding that she sin no more.

Christian, Jewish and secular moral thinking has moved beyond the commands to kill adulterers. Although, these commands can still be found in ancient texts their application today should be totally rejected. They have no place in a civilised society.

Michael Glass,
July 2006