Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - RE: Monotheism was: "admittedly syncretistic..

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Lisbeth S. Fried" <lizfried AT umich.edu>
  • To: "B Hebrew" <b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: RE: Monotheism was: "admittedly syncretistic..
  • Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2002 13:00:55 -0500

This is my understanding as well. Therefore, a person who murders his slave is
not subject to a legal proceeding. If the slave has a family member to avenge his death,
then the family member can try to do so, I suppose. But how likely is it?
A slave then does not have the status a free person, which is no different from
Hammurabi's Code.
Liz
-----Original Message-----
From: Bearpecs AT aol.com [mailto:Bearpecs AT aol.com]
Sent: Sun, January 27, 2002 12:47 PM
To: Biblical Hebrew
Subject: Re: Monotheism was: "admittedly syncretistic..

In a message dated 1/27/02 12:38:55 AM Eastern Standard Time, lizfried AT umich.edu writes:
} I'm not sure about this.It seems if so, then it would say mut, yamut. I don't think a punishment,


I think Milgrom would say that 'mot yumat' applies to judicial execution by a court following a trial, whereas "naqom yenaqem" applies to blood vengeance by a family member.  
Milgrom maintains that "karet" means that G-d will cut off the guilty party's bloodline, and possibly also that he will be denied an afterlife.

---
You are currently subscribed to b-hebrew as: [lizfried AT umich.edu]
To unsubscribe, forward this message to $subst('Email.Unsub')
To subscribe, send an email to join-b-hebrew AT franklin.oit.unc.edu.



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page