koberstein
Active member
If one could speak of Biblical verses as being vilified, then "an eye for an eye" would be the
most vilified verse in the Bible. It is commonly cited to "prove" the existence of an "Old Testament"
ethic of vengefulness, and then contrasted with the New Testament's supposedly higher ethic of
forgiveness. "An eye for an eye" is often associated with modern Jews as well, and invariably in a
pejorative manner. Israel's critics, for example, commonly accuse her of practicing "eye for an eye"
morality when she retaliates against Arab terrorist acts.
In actuality, the biblical standard of "an eye for an eye" stood in stark contrast to the legal standards
prevailing in the societies that surrounded the ancient Hebrews. The Code of Hammurabi, a legal code
hundreds of years older than the Torah, legislated retaliation even against innocent parties. Thus, if
A constructed a building for B, and the building collapsed and killed B's daughter, then A's daughter
was put to death. (Law number 229). The biblical law of "an eye for an eye" restricted punishment solely
to the perpetrator. Furthermore, unlike Hammurabi's code, one who caused another's death accidentally
was never executed.
"An eye for an eye" also served to limit vengeance; it did not permit "a life for an eye" or even "two eyes for
an eye." The operative biblical principal was that punishment must be commensurate with the deed, not to
exceed it. Blood feuds and vendettas were long practiced among the Israelites' neighbors---indeed, they
have persisted in the Middle East until this century---and revenge was often carried out without restraint.
Christians often contend that Jesus went beyond the standard of "an eye for an eye" that he advocated
forgiveness and saw retaliation as unworthy of man. Yet the New Testament records Jesus saying, "But
the one who disowns me in the presence of men, I will disown in the presence of my Father in heaven"
(Matt 10:33). In other words, Jesus seems to advocate treating others as they have treated him; a
standard of justice that is perfectly commensurate with the demand of "an eye for an eye"
In the time of the "Talmud", " an eye for an eye" was not carried out literally, and Orthodox Jewish scholars
teach that it was never practiced. The Talmud's rabbis feared that the very process of removing the
perpetrator's eye might kill him as well, and that, of course, would be forbidden (Bava Kamma 84a)
"an eye for an eye" was therefore understood as requiring monetary compensation equivalent to the
value of an eye. The same understanding was applied to almost all the other punishments enumerated
in the same biblical verse, "a tooth for a tooth, a wound for a wound."
The only punishment in this set that was not converted to a monetary fine was capital punishments for murder,
"a life for a life." Because the Torah believed that premeditated murder deserved the death penalty, there was
no fear of punishing the killer excessively. Jewish law did dictate, however, that murderers be executed in the
quickest manner possible. Hence, later Jewish law forbade the Roman punishment of crucifixion.
Shalom
most vilified verse in the Bible. It is commonly cited to "prove" the existence of an "Old Testament"
ethic of vengefulness, and then contrasted with the New Testament's supposedly higher ethic of
forgiveness. "An eye for an eye" is often associated with modern Jews as well, and invariably in a
pejorative manner. Israel's critics, for example, commonly accuse her of practicing "eye for an eye"
morality when she retaliates against Arab terrorist acts.
In actuality, the biblical standard of "an eye for an eye" stood in stark contrast to the legal standards
prevailing in the societies that surrounded the ancient Hebrews. The Code of Hammurabi, a legal code
hundreds of years older than the Torah, legislated retaliation even against innocent parties. Thus, if
A constructed a building for B, and the building collapsed and killed B's daughter, then A's daughter
was put to death. (Law number 229). The biblical law of "an eye for an eye" restricted punishment solely
to the perpetrator. Furthermore, unlike Hammurabi's code, one who caused another's death accidentally
was never executed.
"An eye for an eye" also served to limit vengeance; it did not permit "a life for an eye" or even "two eyes for
an eye." The operative biblical principal was that punishment must be commensurate with the deed, not to
exceed it. Blood feuds and vendettas were long practiced among the Israelites' neighbors---indeed, they
have persisted in the Middle East until this century---and revenge was often carried out without restraint.
Christians often contend that Jesus went beyond the standard of "an eye for an eye" that he advocated
forgiveness and saw retaliation as unworthy of man. Yet the New Testament records Jesus saying, "But
the one who disowns me in the presence of men, I will disown in the presence of my Father in heaven"
(Matt 10:33). In other words, Jesus seems to advocate treating others as they have treated him; a
standard of justice that is perfectly commensurate with the demand of "an eye for an eye"
In the time of the "Talmud", " an eye for an eye" was not carried out literally, and Orthodox Jewish scholars
teach that it was never practiced. The Talmud's rabbis feared that the very process of removing the
perpetrator's eye might kill him as well, and that, of course, would be forbidden (Bava Kamma 84a)
"an eye for an eye" was therefore understood as requiring monetary compensation equivalent to the
value of an eye. The same understanding was applied to almost all the other punishments enumerated
in the same biblical verse, "a tooth for a tooth, a wound for a wound."
The only punishment in this set that was not converted to a monetary fine was capital punishments for murder,
"a life for a life." Because the Torah believed that premeditated murder deserved the death penalty, there was
no fear of punishing the killer excessively. Jewish law did dictate, however, that murderers be executed in the
quickest manner possible. Hence, later Jewish law forbade the Roman punishment of crucifixion.
Shalom
