![]() If 41 lashes “degrades” the person who wronged in the eyes of the victim, then the perpetrator not degraded at 40 lashes, 39, 20 or even 10? This punishment is severe to convince the wicked person to settle the matter before going to court, but it’s also more for those who would be watching the punishment to push for resolution beforehand. He may beat him forty times but no more, so that he does not beat him with many more stripes than these and your brother is not degraded in your eyes.” (Deut. “If there is a dispute between men and they go to court, and the judges decide their case, and they justify the righteous and condemn the wicked, then it shall be if the wicked man deserves to be beaten, the judge shall then make him lie down and be beaten in his presence with the number of stripes according to his guilt. If you know what is right and don’t do it, it is sin (James 4:17). We cannot skew our judgements because the person is rich or poor, if they are important and powerful or they are homeless with nothing. We can not shrink back from judgment from a misplaced sense of compassion, sentimentality. In that passage, God refused to cancel the judgment because of God’s compassion on the people who have suffered at their hands. I will not relent, and I will not pity and I will not be sorry according to your ways and according to your deeds I will judge you,” declares the Lord GOD.” (Ezek. “I, the LORD, have spoken it is coming and I will act. 24:14, where the word is between “turn back” or “relent” and “repent” or “be sorry”: The basic meaning of khoos is found in Ezek. Its root meaning is womb, the place where the growing child finds comfort and life. A third word is רָחַם rakham (H7355), which is to love, have mercy upon. That is distinguished from חָמַל khamal (H2550), or to spare, be patient with or become responsible for. The first one is חוּס khoos (Strong’s lexicon No. We’ll look at some Hebrew words that are commonly found together in legal matters. ![]() Conflicts in the community must not be ignored but adjudicated and resolved.Īn exception in the Torah for proportionality is judgment of a false witness in a trial (Deut. The native-born and the stranger are judged the same way. 24:18–22 but also “colorblindness” in justice. 21:22–26, since the combatants did not conspire to kill the child, the death of the child is not treated in the same manner as a cold-blooded, planned murder. Today, we have different levels of manslaughter and murder, depending on factors like “malice aforethought,” etc. Strictly speaking, how can a loss of an eye equal freedom? Or how can a fine remedy the loss of human life? It shows us that even the phrase “eye for an eye” is not a mandate for mirror or knee-jerk justice. So, let’s explore where “eye for an eye” is used in the Bible to glean what’s being communicated.Īnd a parable transforms a story or a figure of speech into a lesson that’s more than the words on the page.Ĭonsider the Torah passages that quote “eye for an eye” (Ex. Someone in another culture, another language may not understand. The words are not to be taken literally, but the meaning is culturally understood. We are not to give a reflexive response or “lash out.” Rather, “eye for an eye” is a Bible parabolic idiom teaching proportionality.Īn idiom is a figure of speech, and the Bible has a number of them (e.g., “weeping and gnashing of teeth”). In truth, Bible calls for neither “mirror punishment,” i.e., “tit for tat,” nor vigilante justice. That way the whole world will be blind and toothless.” “ Fiddler on the Roof (1971) quotes.” Internet Movie Database Stride Toward Freedom: The Montgomery Story. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding….” Martin Luther King Jr. The old law of an ‘eye for an eye’ leaves everyone blind. It is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. Martin Luther King Jr.: “Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. This quote is misattributed to Mahatma Ghandi but was put in his mouth in the 1982 film Ghandi. George Perry Graham, during a debate on capital punishment before the Canadian House of Commons: “If in this present age we were to go back to the old time of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,’ there would be very few honourable gentlemen in this House who would not, metaphorically speaking, be blind and toothless.” Official Report of the Debates of the House of Commons of the Dominion of Canada, Third Session, 12th Parliament, Vol. The idea is out there that “eye for an eye” is not an enlightened path of mercy and justice. entered the popular culture in 1971’s Fiddler on the Roof. This was reflected in comments by such esteemed leaders as Canadian MP George Perry Graham and Martin Luther King Jr. Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:07:51 - 15.5MB)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |