[b-hebrew] Isaiah 53 read within the book as a whole

Lisbeth S. Fried lizfried at umich.edu
Wed May 26 16:27:30 EDT 2004


Dear Peter,
I keep thinking of the line in Richard III
where the king says "Do you want me to break my word?
Do you want me to commit treason?"
Best,
Liz

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Kirk [mailto:peterkirk at qaya.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 4:01 PM
> To: Lisbeth S. Fried
> Cc: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] Isaiah 53 read within the book as a whole
> 
> On 26/05/2004 12:50, Lisbeth S. Fried wrote:
> 
> >Dear Vadim,
> >I misspoke, miswrote. I meant for Hebrew writers of the
> >Persian period. Under the Persians you have what has
> >been called a secularization of the law, the merging
> >of the law of the king and the law of the god.
> >Under Hammurabi, for example, just decisions, mishpat,
> >was separate from the gods. Right order, kinatu, was
> >not given by the gods, but part of nature. The gods were
> >deemed too capricious to be held responsible.
> >Now it is interesting that the Priestly code has the
> >law being given by YHWH -- and by Moses. This places
> >Moses (as King) as lawgiver whose laws are synonymous with
> >YHWH's laws. Writers prior to the Persians demand that the
> >king be accountable to torah, correct behavior. This doesn't
> >occur under the Persians, when the king's behavior is torah
> >by definition.
> >The word nomos is a good translation of torah, data, etc.
> >It too does not refer to legislated law, but right thinking,
> >order, tradition, custom, correct procedure, everything in its
> >proper place.
> >Sorry for the confusion,
> >Best,
> >Liz
> >
> >
> >
> This is interesting, Liz, but it seems to disagree with the biblical
> picture of Persian law, under which the laws of the Medes and Persians
> were unchangeable, and the king was bound to obey them even against his
> will, as seen in Daniel 6:7-15 and Esther 7:5-8 (where, because the old
> edict could not be revoked, a new one had to be published which made the
> old one ineffective although still in force). Now is this picture of
> Persian law the same as the one which you are expounding? And, if not,
> how can we know which is more accurate?
> 
> --
> Peter Kirk
> peter at qaya.org (personal)
> peterkirk at qaya.org (work)
> http://www.qaya.org/






More information about the b-hebrew mailing list