Biblical Hebrew Forum

[fred burlingame <tensorpath AT gmail.com>]

no, it's not a theological question;

it's a literature question and a word meaning question.

regards,

fred burlingame

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 3:08 PM, K Randolph <kwrandolph AT gmail.com> wrote:

> Fred:
>
>  On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:34 PM, fred burlingame 
> <tensorpath AT gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> the question implied by the verse and obvious to anyone conversant with
>> that scroll follows.
>>
>> do those particular two words; does the hebrew literature of that
>> scroll; describe a "french judicial system" or an "english judicial 
>> system?"
>>
>
> Just as I expected, a theological question.
>
>>
>> a. In france, government judges decide civil and criminal cases based upon
>> a set of written statutes. The judges hear evidence and announce rulings,
>> applying the statutes to the facts. Written reasons for the rulings, given
>> ... not. The body of written statutes hence, remains inviolate & supreme.
>>
>> b. In england, government judges originally decided civil and criminal
>> cases based upon a written set of statutes. In significant contrast to
>> france, however, england judges write reasons for their rulings. This body
>> of judge written rulings then acquires a life of its own in books, etc.,
>> over the centuries, and eventually eclipses and surpasses the original
>> written set of statutes.
>>
>
> This is a theological question depending on how one defines terms, and
> depending on with whom one interacts. I may disagree with the theological
> reasons, which is why theology is off the table for this discussion group.
>
>>
>>
>> the תלמוד , incorporating the biblical hebrew language, answers that
>> question as "b."
>>
>
> There are those who claim that the Talmud is like the American legal
> system, where the judges write opinions, but those opinions may not
> establish new law (legislate from the bench) and other judges, even a jury
> during a trial by means of jury nullification, may overturn those judges’
> rulings. Jury nullification can even be used to nullify laws that violate
> the Constitution.
>
> Whether that claim is true or not is a theological question that I do not
> want to get into.
>
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> fred burlingame
>>
>> Karl W. Randolph.
>
>