[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Because at this point, an "eye for an eye", a "tooth for a tooth" sounds > > barely acceptable, for I. I won't speak for anybody else. > >
Dan M. replied: >Actually, it sounds like an improvement over the present threats to me. >Remember, when it was written it was, the norm was "a life for an eye, a >life for a tooth." The proper translation, according to Rabbi Jim Brant >(who lives in my community) is "only an eye for an eye, only a tooth for a >tooth." It was a call for moderation in a time when the norm was family >feuds and blood vengence. > And that moderation was turned to near pacifism in Matthew 5 and Luke 6 (foreshadowed at least as early as Isaiah 50) with "turn the other cheek." Not that I'm a pacifist, mind you. Of course, I'm not exactly a war-monger either. What's halfway between a hawk and a dove? Reggie Bautista _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
