Posted on 07/31/2010 6:26:07 AM PDT by Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus
A document written on two cuneiform tablets around the time of the patriarch Abraham, containing a law code in a style and language similar to parts of the famous Code of Hammurabi, has been discovered for the first time in an Israeli archeological dig.
The code, dating from the Middle Bronze Age in the 18th and 17th centuries BCE, was found at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem’s excavations this summer at Hazor National Park in the North. However, it has not yet been determined whether the document was written at Hazor – where a school for scribes was located in ancient times, or brought from elsewhere, said Prof. Wayne Horowitz of the HU Institute of Archeology.
Horowitz, who heads a team that is preparing the Hazor law code fragments for publication in book form, said this week that the discovery opened an interesting avenue for possible further investigation of a connection between biblical law and the Code of Hammurabi.
The Hazor excavations – known as the Selz Foundation Hazor Excavations in memory of Israeli archeologist and politician Prof. Yigael Yadin – are being held under the direction of Horowitz’s colleagues Prof. Amnon Ben-Tor and Dr. Sharon Zuckerman. Yadin directed previous excavations at the site in the 1950s and 1960s and found numerous documents in the palace area.
(Excerpt) Read more at jpost.com ...
Spade-wielders ping
Let me guess - it’s an earmark :)
The barbarism of Islam is derived from the Code of Hammurabi. Eye-for-an-eye, et al.
hmmpf.....it’s still not that old
Actually, Islamic law is derived from a mix of unwritten Arabian tradition combined with elements from Justinian’s law code, as it was found and applied in the eastern Byzantine provinces.
...with a few nasty ideas from the Assyrians and Babylonians thrown in.
Obama’s birth certificate?
“The barbarism of Islam is derived from the Code of Hammurabi. Eye-for-an-eye, et al.”
Try the Bible:
Exodus 21:20-25 But if any harm follows, then you shall give life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, burn for burn, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
And it’s repeated in Leviticus.
|
|
|||
Gods |
Thanks Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus! |
||
|
· Discover · Bronze Age Forum · Science Daily · Science News · Eurekalert · PhysOrg · · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · Archaeology · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · · History topic · history keyword · archaeology keyword · paleontology keyword · · Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · · |
|||
The barbarism of Islam goes beyond and eye for an eye. That was the Old Testament, a very LONG time ago and Christianity was introduced since; however, Islam STILL uses the ideas of the Old Testament.
Even the Old Testament didn’t have women beated/ostracized when she was the victim of a rape. Also, I don’t recall anywhere in the Bible advocating suicide raids and using children and woman as combatants.
Never mind. It was just a 1683 Census Form that was never filled out.
“Even the Old Testament didn’t have women beated/ostracized when she was the victim of a rape. Also, I don’t recall anywhere in the Bible advocating suicide raids and using children and woman as combatants.”
Thank you for letting me know what you can’t recall.
Perhaps you can recall all the times God commanded “his people” to go into a city and slaughter every innocent man, woman, and child, even the animals, such as:
Thus saith the Lord of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and sucking, ox and sheep, camel and ass. [I Samuel 15:3]
Perhaps the style of Old Testament atrocities were different, but in my book, evil is evil.
Only you are making a comparisons between religions. I’m just pointing out the source of some bad ideas. Most of the Koran is stolen from or corruptions of Biblical teaching.
Hank
Context is king when dealing with such. Fair treatment here: Is Yahweh a Moral Monster?
http://www.epsociety.org/library/articles.asp?pid=45&mode=detail
They had cross-dressers in the 13th century BC?
What “context” exactly justifies the slaughter of children and infants, not to mention donkeys and asses?
Notes: (1) Ch 23:1 in Heb (a) Lev 18:8; Lev 20:11; Deu 27:20; 1Co 5:1 Poor translation or eisegesis.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
<03671> @n"K' kanaph (489b)
NAU Deuteronomy 22:30 "A man shall not take his father's wife so that he will not uncover his father's skirt.
Meaning: wing, extremity
Origin: from an unused word
Usage: bird*(1), corner(1), corners(4), covering(1), each other(1), edge(5), edges(1), ends(3), fold(2), garment(1), kind(3), skirt(3), skirts(1), sorts(1), wing(14), winged(5), wings(58), wings were each other(1), wingspan(1).
I guess you did not read the article. Your charge is that according to your infinite understanding of these events, and your standard of morality, God did not act in accordance with His own morality, or that you have a higher one. However, when i look at it objectively, I see it as both just and an act of mercy.
Questions that can be asked include,
1. Authority: Did God, who gave the command, make it abundantly manifest to Israel that He was real, and the author of life, and the law giver?
2. Does a just God have the right to take as well as to give life?
3. Is God cruel when He punishes the guilty, and is God punishing the innocent when He takes their life, by whatever means?
4. What should be done with an exceedingly wicked people, who had gone contrary to the light given them, and whose iniquity God endured with much longsuffering? And which would corrupted the immature Israelites?
A. Leave them alone, but turn all their weapons into molten steel, and suppose the infant nation of Israel would at least resist their moral corruption.
B. Form a two-state solution, with a Joshua Carter to keep peace.
C. Kill only the men, and turn Israel into a giant social agency.
D. Have Israel utterly wipe them out, thus sparing the innocent from being part of a damned society.
While it is true that God could have brought even Sodom to repentance, God does not owe anyone grace, and even the wicked receive multitude mercies, yet judgment does happen, and “we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against those who commit such things” (Rm. 2:2), and He does so in accordance to the light and ability given, and serves as a deterrent to others.
In acting as God did,
1. It saved the innocent from becoming abused and corrupted as they they would have, in an society given to widespread self-destructive iniquity. God shortened the cycle. I am of the persuasion here that children to a certain indefinite degree of maturity are not culpable, and will not be punished, as per Dt. 24:16; Rev. 20:12-14. The may be not be said to be righteous, that of having tested virtue, but they can be considered innocent.
2. It spared Israel from a massive social burden they were not ready to meet. And God shows elsewhere that He places a priority upon caring for fatherless and widows while they sojourn in this life, which is necessary for a healthy society. But a society can become so corrupted that it fitting to remove it.
Such destruction was a very rare thing, and only occurred in cases of pervasive iniquity and or pernicious perversity, and which mandated radical action.
In Gn. 6:5-6 it declares that “GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.” And thus the author of life ended it. Life on land died in so doing, but which God gave anyway, and so He began anew with Noah.
Next is Sodom, a city given to pride, selfishness, sensuality and perversity therein, which was destroyed while saving perhaps only nominally righteous Lot, who did earnestly care for strangers (more than his virgin daughters).
And the we have the conquests of Joshua, which are according to the above, in wiping out the morally corrupted Canaanites while establishing Israel.
In all this we see that God is not acting contrary to His standards of justice, which require justice, and as the law-giver He may uniquely exercise such in a degree those under Him may not, in and of themselves.
We also see that God esteems life, while iniquity destroys it in more ways than one, and it was in the interest of righteousness and life that judgment took place.
God threatened Divine execution upon those who oppress the fatherless and the widow, “If thou afflict them in any wise, and they cry at all unto me, I will surely hear their cry;24 And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless.” (Ex. 22:22-24)
And He also says, “As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?” (Ezek. 32:11).
We see in the judgments against Israel that it was preceded by prolonged rebellion and wickedness, as well as warnings of various prophets, and the final judgment upon souls on the earth will be after 1,000 years of Christ reigning on the earth, and multitudes who “will not have this Man rule over us” rebelling at the end, perhaps led by ___, and being slain by supernatural means. (Rev. 20:7-11).
And it is in this life, manifest by small decisions as well as large, that it is revealed, who is on the Lord’s side, who will serve the King.
May all of me always be for Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.