Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

In honor of July 4'th...the lesser known American Heroes thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    It is "You will not murder" not "You will not kill". The definition, at it's most basic is killing is morally wrong and murder is not. What does that mean? Murder is defined by taking a life against the wishes of G-D. What is that? Outside of a court of law(which grew to basically never use the death penalty), outside of war or outside of self defence. All other instances in which you end someones life, is murder.

    I am ashamed to say I don't remember EVERYTHING that is perscribed for manslaughter, accidental murder. I believe it sides towards mercy on the "killer", allowing them to flee to areas where they can't be hurt-the general view on cases of manslaughter is if they are guilty, G-D will take care of it, as he passes justice on all unknown tresspases. Whether it was through ignorance or not is also important.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Vesayen
      It is "You will not murder" not "You will not kill". The definition, at it's most basic is killing is morally wrong and murder is not. What does that mean? Murder is defined by taking a life against the wishes of G-D. What is that? Outside of a court of law(which grew to basically never use the death penalty), outside of war or outside of self defence. All other instances in which you end someones life, is murder.

      I am ashamed to say I don't remember EVERYTHING that is perscribed for manslaughter, accidental murder. I believe it sides towards mercy on the "killer", allowing them to flee to areas where they can't be hurt-the general view on cases of manslaughter is if they are guilty, G-D will take care of it, as he passes justice on all unknown tresspases. Whether it was through ignorance or not is also important.
      additionally there is a famous quote from the Talmud "a (central) court that passes more than one death penalty in a generation is a bloody court" This quote establishes the "liberal" side of the death penalty debate within traditional Jewish law, that the DP should be rare. The response is that if such a position were followed "murders would multiply in Israel" Thus the CONSERVATIVE POV, which allows for more frequent use of the DP, is still based on deterrence concerns, and does not accept the DP based on vengeance alone.

      But in the case of York we're not discussing the DP, but killing as part of war. Which again, is licit in certain (but not all) circumstances.
      "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

      Comment


      • #18
        Jewish courts took the rule from the Torah that you need two witnesses to a murder and extrapolated on it. Now you need two and they both need to warn the person "Do you understand that you are about to commit murder and that is is a sin?" and more. The death penalty became non existant.

        The ASSUMPTION is it *FAR* better to let a guilty man free then to execute an innocent one, since G-D in his wisdom will punish the murderer in his time.

        I'd like to know this assumption goes one way-towards leniency. There is *NOTHING* in Judaism like the savage medevil trial by ordeal, where yo do unspeakably evil things to someone and if they are innocent, G-D will save them!

        Comment


        • #19
          The Hebrew word used in all available acient texts is specific to murder, unlawful killing, and there was a separte word for killing in general. That shalt not kill is just King James Version translation and some that follow its form. The best translation is
          "Murder not."
          What was consiidered murder among the pre Israel tribes and the ancient Hebrew Kingdoms evolved condsiderable over time. Originally, murder only applied to the unjustified killing of the patrarch of your extended family, later to any adult male of the extended family, later to an adult male of your tribe, and later in the Kingdoms to an adult Hebrew male of the Kingdom. Killing women and children were property crimes until sometime after the return from exile in Babylon.
          Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
          Japher: "crap, did I just post in this thread?"
          "Bloody hell, Lefty.....number one in my list of persons I have no intention of annoying, ever." Bugs ****ing Bunny
          From a 6th grader who readily adpated to internet culture: "Pay attention now, because your opinions suck"

          Comment


          • #20
            ..........do you have a single shred of documentable historic evidence for that barbaric claim? Do you realize that places a monetary value on human life goes against the oldest rules and traditions of Judaism, who only allows the existance of slavery grudgingly and even then, it is never permanent?

            Comment


            • #21
              IIRC, you can instance in the bible showing various the killings to be civil property matters. Certainly it is some of the ancient text fragments before the the revsions made after the return from exile in Babylon . If you want to pay (in advance) for legal research at the rate $300 an hour, I could look up serveral treatises covering the subject.
              Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
              Japher: "crap, did I just post in this thread?"
              "Bloody hell, Lefty.....number one in my list of persons I have no intention of annoying, ever." Bugs ****ing Bunny
              From a 6th grader who readily adpated to internet culture: "Pay attention now, because your opinions suck"

              Comment


              • #22
                Which killings are civil property matters?

                And no, I don't feel like paying your $300.00 hourly rate but if you make such an inflamatory claim, you should be prepared to back it up.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Lefty Scaevola
                  IIRC, you can instance in the bible showing various the killings to be civil property matters. Certainly it is some of the ancient text fragments before the the revsions made after the return from exile in Babylon . If you want to pay (in advance) for legal research at the rate $300 an hour, I could look up serveral treatises covering the subject.
                  surely you mean interpretations of the age of different portions of the text, based on stylistic and other criteria. J,E, P and D, and all that. NOT actual fragments. AFAIK there are NO extant physical texts of the Hebrew bible older than the dead sea scrolls (200 BCE, at the earliest) and certainly none predating the Babylonian exile.
                  "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Vesayen
                    ..........do you have a single shred of documentable historic evidence for that barbaric claim? Do you realize that places a monetary value on human life goes against the oldest rules and traditions of Judaism, who only allows the existance of slavery grudgingly and even then, it is never permanent?
                    actually the notion of resolving disputes, including blood feuds, by monetary compensation IS Jewish law, IIUC. And is seen by some authorities as an advance over the code of Hammurabi. What im not familiar with is the claim that this was differentiated by gender in the Hebrew code. But then this is hardly my area of expertise.
                    "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by lord of the mark
                      surely you mean interpretations of the age of different portions of the text, based on stylistic and other criteria. J,E, P and D, and all that. NOT actual fragments. AFAIK there are NO extant physical texts of the Hebrew bible older than the dead sea scrolls (200 BCE, at the earliest) and certainly none predating the Babylonian exile.
                      That is correct, as I recall, for the biblical material. I believe there are some chains of martrial outside the bible for their legal development, and well as Hebrew religious material and mythology not incorporated into the Bible. The Ancient Hebrew kingdoms appear to have assimilated a significant amount of Hittie law.
                      Gaius Mucius Scaevola Sinistra
                      Japher: "crap, did I just post in this thread?"
                      "Bloody hell, Lefty.....number one in my list of persons I have no intention of annoying, ever." Bugs ****ing Bunny
                      From a 6th grader who readily adpated to internet culture: "Pay attention now, because your opinions suck"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        So by your definition, state-sponsored murder doesn't count? Talk about convenient interpretation
                        Speaking of Erith:

                        "It's not twinned with anywhere, but it does have a suicide pact with Dagenham" - Linda Smith

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          lawful killing is not murder, at least not in the Hebrew scriptures. Now you dont have to ACCEPT the Hebrew scriptures, but Corp York did, and he was whom we were discussing.
                          "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            I'ld like to nominate all the classes of people referred to in the Miller beer "Real American Heroes" advertising campaign including but not limitted to:

                            Foam Finger guy
                            Comb Over guy
                            Speedo/Thong Swimming suit guy
                            Talk Too Loudly guy
                            "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                            “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Re: Re: Re: In honor of July 4'th...the lesser known American Heroes thread

                              Originally posted by Urban Ranger


                              You don't look like a biblical scholar.
                              Do you ever tire of being wrong?
                              I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                              For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: In honor of July 4'th...the lesser known American Heroes thread

                                Originally posted by lord of the mark
                                "Shimon Lebowitz raises a very cogent point to my assertion that
                                >>"Thou shalt not kill" is a mistranslation because if we could not kill, we could not make war or execute a murderer: ergo the correct translation should be "Thou shalt not murder."<<

                                Reb Shimon notes >>While I have used this exact argument many times myself, I cannot but feel a bit uncomfortable when I read Bamidbar 35:30 "lefi eidim yirtzach et ha-rotzei'ach" - on the basis of witnesses
                                shall the murderer be ... *murdered*?? Obviously in this context the verb does *not* mean murder, does it?<<
                                That's nice, but external moral/ethical biases should not influence the correct translation. IOW, just because you don't like it doesn't mean that's not what it says.

                                Originally posted by lord of the mark
                                It seems that the Hebrew word "tirtzach/yirtzach" must always be
                                taken in context. When the Torah says "Lo tirtzach," it means "Thou
                                shalt not **illegally** shed blood" -- i.e. murder. In the verse
                                concerning "lefi eidim yirtzach et ha-rotzei'ach" it means Thou shalt
                                **legally** shed blood via capital punishment."
                                The context is the bible itself at most, and Exodus specifically. Not something else.
                                (\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
                                (='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
                                (")_(") "Starting the fire from within."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X