Today we continue our study of the “Sermon on the Mount”. What does the Bible phrase "eye for an eye" MEAN? http://andnowyouknowmore.blogspot.com Does this Biblical verse "eye for an eye" mean that we can punish, or take revenge on, someone that has injured us? Some people feel that reciprocity is justified.
Jesus is quoting from this verse from Exodus 21:22.
Exodus 21:24-28 (KJV)
24 Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
25 Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe.
26 And if a man smite the eye of his servant, or the eye of his maid, that it perish; he shall let him go free for his eye 's sake.
In these verses God was giving a rule to regulate the decisions of judges. They were to take eye for
…show more content…
Leading up to it, the Bible discusses in verse 22 of chapter 21 the compensation a woman who was pregnant was to receive if she accidentally lost her baby due to men fighting (but she herself was not otherwise harmed). If a woman who is pregnant, however, not only miscarries but is also injured then God states what the punishment should …show more content…
If men strive and strike a pregnant woman, so that there is a miscarriage, and no harm follows, he shall surely be punished, according as the woman 's husband will lay upon him. And he shall pay as the judges determine. 23. And if any injury occurs, then you shall give life for life, 24. Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot, 25. Burning for burning, wound for wound, stripe for stripe (Exodus 21: 22 - 25, HBFV)
Let us assume for a moment that the literal meaning of the above verses is applied when YOU are the one responsible for someone harming themselves. What should you do if the neighbor 's child climbs your fence around your backyard and accidently drowns in your pool? Would or should you allow your neighbor to take one of YOUR children and drown him or her? What would you do if some financial advice you gave someone (whether as a professional or just a friend) was wrong and caused them to lose money? Would you allow them to withdraw the same amount of the loss from your bank account?
In context, Exodus 21:23 and 24 are NOT laying out a rule that individuals should personally use when they either cause or suffer loss. They delineate a principle on how the nation of Israel (or any government) should administer justice for its people as a whole. In the same chapter, just before the phrase we are studying is used, the Bible states, "Whoever hits his father or his mother is to be put to death" (verse
takes the form of “an eye for an eye”, meaning that the offender should be punished by an act of
then, it was an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth. Or a life for a life. But
Sometimes we can not always give what they deserve but, giving them less than what they deserve is unfair. The bible believes in an eye for an eye. Meaning you can kill someone who has killed. I believe in punishing murders and they should get nothing less than what they deserve, but an eye for an eye, to me, is not always the correct punishment. I am in favor of proportional retributivism because it allows flexibility within a range of murder cases. It would allow a more heinous murderer to receive the death penalty and a less severe murder criminal to receive life in prison without violating
...requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. “ (Romans 2:14-16)
Therefore, the Lex Talionis is established. If a person commits a crime, an equivalent punishment is allowed to be executed. The Lex Talionis principle is a technique used to proportionate the punishment of the criminal. This principle is used to protect one’s life, family, and possessions. If a person causes a women a miscarriage, and the baby is harmed, the convict would be judged with the Lex Talionis principle. According to Exodus 21:22-25, the penalty for the baby’s death and the mother’s injury is the offender’s life (ESV). This established fair treatment is a guide for judges to assess the damage that has occurred. This principle signifies the importance of one’s life and how much it is
A well-known writing that is connected to Hammurabi was the Code of Hammurabi, which is a large stone pillar that contains hundreds, maybe even thousands of laws and codes that the people of Mesopotamia were to follow. It is believed that Hammurabi believed in a black-and-white justice system (Hill 8-26-15). Law 196 in the Code states that, “If a man has destroyed the eye of another free man, his own eye shall be destroyed” (The Judgements of Hammurabi, 16). This brings a literal demonstration to the saying “an eye for an eye”. Even though this seems to be a harsh penalty to some, this shows that Hammurabi believed in his own take of equality in punishment. This is an example of Hammurabi’s teaching to his people of morals and ethics; if a person were to do a wrong action to another that same action would be done to him or her in response. However, the “eye for an eye” justice doesn’t only apply towards the offender themselves, but to others in his or her life. Law 230 in the Code of Hammurabi states that in a certain situation that if a person were to build a house for another and the house was not built properly and “the child of the householder is killed, the child of the builder shall be slain” (The Judgements of Hammurabi, 17). Again, another extreme display of “an eye for an eye”; except this form of justice punishes a wrongdoer’s child and not themselves. This is also
There are many scriptural references that make the point that the murderer must be punished. Nevertheless, biblical tradition is also replete with reminders that vengeance belongs to the Lord and that he enjoins the qualities of compassion and forgiveness on those believers in the biblical revelation of God. (Amo...
...man soldiers use infants and babies as targets for machine guns. These Jewish babies were tossed into the air and used as target practice for the German machine gunners. The soldiers were never told to do this; they chose to. They made their own personal choice to kill the babies. It is natural instinct for humans to protect babies and infants. In order for the soldiers to shoot them, they had to deliberately go against their nature to kill the babies.
The term “eye for an eye” is derived from the Latin words lex talionis. In the words of Stephen Nathanson it means, “What people deserve as recipients of rewards or punishments is determined what they do as agents.” In my opinion, criminals take life, liberty, peace, goods, in order to reward themselves with undeserved benefits. Deserved punishment protects society. Once a person no longer abides by the laws which govern society, they are no longer entitled to the protection of the laws of society. Meaning, if you choose to break the law and kill a person, you no longer should have the same rights as those who respect law and authority and you are no longer protected under those said rights. There must be dire consequences for heinous crimes. There should be set standards of punishment. We as a society have an obligation to protect and seek justice for those who abide by social order. We must
Not many people realize that the death of a child is NOT in accordance to God’s NORMAL scheme of things. It is unnatural. God did not mean for a child to go first. A child buries the parent. Not the parent buries the child.
“Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass” (Samuel 15:3). In this passage of the bible, God gives the order to kill and cause harm to men, women, and essentially any living being. Here harm is seen as acceptable and a reasonable action since God – the all-knowing, higher being, orders humans to kill. Evidently, in this passage, harm is interpreted differently than other times since it is seemed to be justified and wanted by
...id and Job, both of these things are not applied. In this manner, the stories very often violate the same commandments meant to bring not only justice, but also morality, and other such virtues to a society and its people. Further, it is often God himself, in whose image man was created, who violates his own commandments, and due to this, can man be expected to adhere to the same commandments broken by God if he has been created in God's image? God is explicitly unjust, vengeful, and jealous, particularly in the story of Job. If God is to be an example for the ideal being, then how is it that his nature can express the same things he denounces in his guide, The Bible? All of these questions ultimately lead into one main question, which is in regards to whether or not a people who are led by an unjust God truly have the capability of developing a "just society".
This paper will focus on Proverbs 10, 12, and 14, Solomon’s Proverbs, to display this theme of choice and discernment. Proverb 10 is an antithetical parallelism, because the second line is opposite of the first. This passage is both observational and didactic. Some of the passages are subtle entities and some are teachings that promote an ideal. “ Wise children make their fathers proud of them; foolish ones bring their mothers grief” (10:1). This first passage is very simple; if you are wise, then you will be good to your parents, the teaching is, do not be foolish. The next passage has great insight, “wealth you get by dishonesty will do you no good, but honesty can save your life” (10:2). This passage is an ellipsis because it leaves out detail to how exactly honesty can save your life, but it will do you more good than being dishonest. You will be rewarded for choosing to act wisely. “The Lord will not let good people go hungry, but he will keep the wicked from getting what they want” (10:3). This passage shows the world as a just world, that God/dess will keep things even keel, even though this is not the case. Things are unfair sometimes, and using observation on personal life experiences, bad things can happen to good people. Although this passage does teach that if you choose to be good, you will be taken care of, and if you choose to be wicked you will not always get what you want. There are two choices here on how to live, good or wicked, and good judgment would be choosing to be good. It encourages again the need for right decision making. These passages lack emotion; they are just a steady flow of advice. They speak of retribution; you will get what’s coming to you. If you choose to be lazy, you will be poor and not achieve any status, if you choose...
In addition, the Bible doesn’t mention anything that explicitly condemns abortion. Abortion will not stop. Limiting female access to legal procedures or adequate public health service, will only cause death of females. If abortion becomes illegal or is restriction, it may result in back-alley abortions or unsafe procedures will then, not only threatens the mother 's life, but also her unborn child. Unwanted children are severely abused and often are abandoned, which then will cause a strain on society as a hold. Mishell, Jr., MD, say that, before abortion was legalized in the 1970’s, women would frequently try to induce abortions by using coat hangers, knitting needles, or radiator flush. By restricting proper abortion procedures, put women in