You got it right--the distinction between criminal killing and the offing,
say, of a village of Philistines.
Societies have tended to regulate the administering of death to about the
same degree as fertility.
The old testament is largely tribal myth and history, and a central concern
is the tribe's survival, by almost whatever means. The new testament is
about one man's career and what a few of his disciples did afterwards. Most
of what made it particular to place was washed out of it. Then of course
there's Revelation, a pretty violent fantasy. It took believers a couple of
more centuries before they got to act on their fantasy.
It's good to remember that Christianity's triumph was the result of a
pagan's emperor's decision to promote it by pretty violent means because in
a dream he's been told that its dominant symbol would help him kick ass.
Boy do I spell badly at three in the morning.
Mark
At 01:59 AM 5/17/2005, you wrote:
>Mark Weiss said:
>
> > You might want to remember that Christianity as religion of piece is a few
> > small chapters in a large and violent text.
>
>What about the OT/NT split in this area? I don't see the NT as particularly
>condoning violence, anything but, even though violence has been committed in
>its name. But the same, of course, goes for the Koran.
>
>This is mostly irrelevant, but it's been in my mind.
>
>The KJV translation of the 6th commandment runs, "Thou shalt not kill."
>
>How does it run in the original Hebrew? I've always wondered if the
>original meant something more like "Thou shalt not commit murder."
>
>I suppose I could chase it for myself, but it's simpler to ask you, Mark.
>
> <g>
>
>The Enigmatic Mouse.
|