barcodecontrol.com

HOMICIDE IN THE BIBLICAL WORLD in .NET Generator USS Code 39 in .NET HOMICIDE IN THE BIBLICAL WORLD




How to generate, print barcode using .NET, Java sdk library control with example project source code free download:
HOMICIDE IN THE BIBLICAL WORLD using barcode integration for visual .net control to generate, create bar code 39 image in visual .net applications. Java programming language must receive new informatio .net framework barcode 39 n.4 What judicial dif culty underlies the case in Leviticus 24 The description provides only a few details: During the course of a ght with an Israelite, a person of mixed parentage blasphemed the Israelite God, YHWH.

The restatement of the case in casuistic form presents the rule that all who blaspheme YHWH are subject to the jurisdiction of Israelite law without regard to the ethnic status of the offender. Blaspheming YHWH is punishable whether the offender is Israelite without question or is of mixed parentage whose covenantal status is unclear. The ruling in this case is that the law is to be applied to the citizen and alien alike.

5 The point of the law on assault being appended to the blasphemy law is that penalties for killing an animal and for killing a person also apply to citizen and alien alike. (We can extrapolate from this statement the recognition that biblical differs from nonbiblical law on penalties for killing.) The emphasis on the same law applying to citizen and alien is integral to the passage whether or not the assault law was original to the passage.

The start and conclusion of this pericope contain similar wording: Lev 24:17, . v n t\f v o hRsm htZ v o hGrW t y t m ! 1 v oAl hD yH vy6 ; and 24:21, m . t ! 1 hGrW hRsm htZi hGrW.

This phenomenon, denoted by the technical mWy term Wiederaufname, often indicates interpolated material.6 Although this phenomenon is present in Lev 24:17 21, this does not eliminate an organic connection between the attached material and that to which it is attached. There is an indistinct boundary here between authorial and scribal activities, if indeed authorship and scribal transmission are separate at all.

7 The substance of the section dealing directly with homicide is re ected in its literary structure (Lev 24:17 21): a. (v. 17) tmwy twm !da `pn lk hky yk `yaw b.

(v. 18) `pn tjt `pn hnml`y hmhb `pn hkmw c. (v.

19) wl h`[y @k h`[ r`ak wtym[b !wm @ty yk `yaw d. (v. 20a) @` tjt @` @y[ tjt @y[ rb` tjt rb` c .

(v. 20b) wb @tny @k !dab !wm @ty r`ak. 4 Lev 24:10 23 does not tak e into account the principle that a person may only be punished for conduct de ned as criminal before he acted, a concept termed legality in American law. Cf. Dressler, Understanding Criminal Law, 29.

5 The equality of alien and citizen is a major theme of H (Knohl, The Sanctuary of Silence, 21). Cf. Lev 17:8, 10, 12, 13, 15.

6 The signi cance of Wiederaufnahme for literary criticism is discussed by Curt Kuhl, Die Wiederaufnahme ein literarkritische Prinzip ZAW 65 (1952), 1 11. An alternate use of the term is discussed in Shemaryahu Talmon and Michael Fishbane, Issues in the Ordering of Selected s of Ezekiel [Hebrew], Tarbiz 42 (1972 1973), 35 38 (a translation of this article is The Structuring of Biblical Books: Studies in the Book of Ezekiel, Annual of the Swedish Theological Institute in Jerusalem 10 [1976], 143 146); and Talmon, The Presentation of Synchroneity and Simultaneity in Biblical Narrative, in Literary Studies in the Hebrew Bible: Form and Content (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1993), 112 133. 7 Fishbane, Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, 86.

. LEX TALIONIS b . (v. 21a) hnml`y hmh b hkmw a .

(v. 21b) tmwy !da hkmw a. If a man strikes another and kills him, he shall surely be killed.

b. The one who strikes an animal and kills it shall make restitution, a life for a life. c.

If a man maims his fellow, as he has done so shall it be done to him, d. a fracture for a fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, c . as he maims a man so shall it be done to him.

b . The one who strikes an animal (and kills it) shall make restitution, a . and the one who strikes a man and kills him shall be killed.

The chiastic structure of the passage reveals its trifurcated content: 1) Lex talionis applied to nonfatal bodily injuries; 2) the differentiation between the penalty for killing a man and for killing an animal; and 3) the equivalence of lex talionis applied to the death of an animal, in the form `pn tjt `pn, and hnml`y, compensation. The problem of lex talionis is revealed most acutely in this passage. The statute makes a clear distinction between the remedy for the killing of a human being and that for killing of an animal execution in contrast to compensation.

What is striking is that the principle enunciated for the killing of an animal is a life for a life, a statement usually understood as forbidding compensatory payments, but the remedy for killing an animal is compensation. The penalty for slaying a human being is death, but lex talionis is not used as the reason. Moreover, the principle of punishment for nonfatal bodily injury is a fracture for a fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.

At rst glance, it would appear that there is a relationship between a life for a life and a fracture for a fracture, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth simply on the basis of linguistic similarity: Both are formulations of lex talionis and both make an equivalence between injuries. However, the rst is applied to the death of an animal, the second to the nonfatal injury of a human being, and neither is applied to the death of a human being. What, then, is the signi cance of lex talionis ` First of all, the polarity between retaliation and compensation vis-a-vis a fatality is not as complete as may initially be thought.

Certainly, in Leviticus, lex talionis is set in a context in which the authors felt that talionic punishment involved compensation.8 Secondly, the remedy for killing an animal is that the animal must be replaced in kind the object lost is replaced by an object of the same species, not in money.9 There is a cognitive distinction between repaying in kind and paying in currency.

Lex talionis, then, expresses.
Copyright © barcodecontrol.com . All rights reserved.