The Aquarian Agrarian: Old Testament

Showing posts with label Old Testament. Show all posts

Friday, March 22, 2019

Eighty-Four Religious Texts Not Included in the King James Version of the Bible (Incomplete)

I have compiled this list of antilegomena, Apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, so as to include:

1) texts which were omitted from the King James Bible (i.e., the "normal books" of the Bible, or homologoumena, or anagignoskomena),
2) texts which pertain to hermetic Christian and Jewish religious tradition but were never considered for inclusion in that Bible,
3) other hermetic texts which could, just as well, have been included in the Bible, if the texts in #2 had been included, and
4) books which are accepted as parts of the Bible by certain sects of Christianity, but not by others.

The term pseudepigrapha refers to texts which are not formally considered to be considered part of accepted scripture; and/or to texts, the genuineness of whose origin, is doubtful. The term Apocrypha refers to probably falsely attributed texts composed by Christian patriarchs around the year 200 C.E.. The Roman Catholic Church calls the Apocrypha "Deuterocanonical Books".

Due to my limited knowledge on this subject, I cannot include any more information than I include below. If I knew more, I would at least make a note as to whether these texts exist in the first place. Some do, and some don't; while (I would suspect) others exist in part, and there are disputes about others.

I have organized this list as close to chronological order as I am aware. I'm positive that it's not correct, because I have not looked at any specific information estimating how long ago these texts originated.

What follows is a list of hermetic Jewish and Christian texts, which would have been in the Old and New Testaments had they been included in the Bible. I have also included a short list of books which are likely to have much more information on these subjects.

If I accidentally included a text that is in the K.J.V., then (at least I hope) it is probably a text that is still worth inclusion here, because it is not in all Bibles (and is accepted as part of the Bible by some Christian traditions or sects, but not by others).
I would like to have included texts from Islam, and from non-Abrahamic religions and traditions (as well as texts regarding the Babylonian Talmud and Jerusalem Talmud), but those topics will have to lie beyond the scope of this article.

You can find out more about hermetic religious topics by visiting the following link:
http://aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2019/03/sixty-one-topics-in-esoteric-and.html

And watch these videos to learn some background on pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srQcM0UrFkg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VsCOLR7lCgs

Please feel free to comment below, or email me at jwkopsick@gmail.com, if you have any comments or questions on these subjects; or any suggestions as to how to correct the chronological order of the texts. I would appreciate it if readers would share any links to reliable information about the origin of scriptural texts, whether included in the K.J.V. (King James Version) or not.

Old Testament Era

1. The Dead Sea Scrolls
(including the Damascus Document / Cairo Damascus document / Damascus Rule;
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus_Document)

2. The texts of the Nag Hammadi Library
(Note: These include:
- "The Thunder, Perfect Mind", edited by George McRae;
- "The Gospel of Truth" (which tells of Jesus as not a created being);
- "The Gospel of Philip")

3. The Story of Lilith
(Note: This is a sort of prologue to the Book of Genesis, which is included in some Jewish Bibles)

4. 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Books of Enoch

5. The Book of Knowledge / The Key of Enoch

6. "The Sixth and Seventh Books of Moses"

7. Kaballah
(Note: Kaballah is not a single book, but a set of texts which includes The Zohar, and texts regarding the Hebrew gematria.)

8. The Book of Lamech

9. Twelve Patriarchs

10. Prayer of Joseph

11. Eldad and Modad

12. Testament of Moses

13. Assumption of Moses

14. Psalms of Solomon / Song of Solomon / Book of Wisdom

15. Apocalypse of Elijah

16. Ascension of Elijah

17. Apocalypse of Zephaniah

18. Apocalypse of Zechariah

19. Apocalyptic Ezra

20. 1st and 2nd Books of Esdras

21. The Songs of the Three Holy Children

22. The History of Susana

23. "Bel and the Dragon"

24. The Prayer for Manasses

25. The Book of Ezekiel

26. The Book of Proverbs

Apocrypha / Deuterocanonical Books
(Between the Old and New Testament eras; included in the Septuagint)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeVz-yvX39o

27. The Book of Tobit

28. The Book of Judith

29. The Book of Baruch / "Baruch, with the Epistle Jeremy"

30. The Wisdom of Solomon / The Book of Wisdom
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Wisdom

31. Sirach / Wisdom of Sirach / The Book of Sirach / the Book of Ecclesiasticus
(The Book of the All-Virtuous Wisdom of Yeshua ben Sira
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirach

32. 1st and 2nd Books of Maccabees

33. The Book of Daniel

34. The Book of Esther
(remnants exist, one reason for exclusion is that it doesn't use the name of G-d)

New Testament Era

35. The Book of Jude (includes quotes from the Book of Enoch)

36. The Gospel of the Hebrews / The Gospel of the Nazarenes (might not exist)

37. The Gospel According to Jesus

38. The Gospel of Judas

39. The Gospel of Thomas / The Gospel of Thomas Didymus (or Didymos, or Didymos Judas)
(Note: There may be more than one books of Thomas. Also, the Gospel of Thomas could not possibly have been written by Thomas.)

40. Gospel of Thomas, Son of Jesus

41. Rumored gospels of Christ, consisting of testimony by any of the "brothers" of Jesus named in the Book of Mark and the Book of Matthew.
(Note: In those gospels, the brothers of Jesus - whether this means metaphorical brothers or actual blood siblings - include James, Joses/Joseph, Judas, Simon, and several unnamed sisters.)

42. Rumored gospels supposedly written by a twin brother of Jesus.
(Note: Such a text, if it exists, may or may not be the same as one or more of the texts described in #39 and #41, above. Also, texts supposedly exist which further claim that a brother of Jesus - maybe even an identical twin brother - took Jesus's place on the cross, while the real Jesus went to Asia and learned about Eastern religions, including Buddhism, and maybe even martial arts.

43. Rumored texts alleging that Jesus turned water to wine by swallowing grapes and water, and using his own vomit to ferment the grapes and water into wine.
(Note: I was told that the book The Bible As History discusses this possibility.)

44. Rumored texts alleging that Jesus killed another child when they were both young boys.

45. The Gospel of Mary, Mother of Jesus
(Note: A text called the Gospel of Mary may be the testimony of the mother of Jesus or Mary Magdalene. Also, if gospels of Mary Mother of Jesus exist, there may be more than one of them.)

46. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene
(Note: if the Gospel of Mary is the testimony of Jesus's mother, then it is less likely that the Gospel of Mary Magdalene exists, but still not impossible that a separate Gospel of Mary Magdalene exists, nonetheless.)

47. The Gospel of Peter
(which tells of Jesus's mother Mary as remaining a virgin throughout her life)

48. I and II Peter / The First and Second Books of Peter / The 1st and 2nd Epistles of Peter
(the author of the second book is almost certainly not Peter, however)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Epistle_of_Peter

49. The Apocalypse of Peter

50-55. The Galasian Decree, incl.
50. Acts of Peter
51. Acts of Philip
52. Gospel of Matthias
53. Gospel According to Barnabas (no texts may exist, but Epistle of Barnabas is a relevant text)
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/Blackhirst_Barnabas.html

54. Gospel of Peter the Apostle

55. Gospel of James the Less (which is probably the same thing as The Protoevangelium of James / The Infancy Gospel of James)

56. The History of James

(Note: may or may not be the same as #41 &/or #55.)

57. The Didache

58. The Itinerary and Teaching of the Apostles

59. The Epistle of Barnabas

60. Acts of Paul

61. Apocalypse of Paul

62. Didascalia of Clement / Teachings of Clement / Ordinances of the Holy Apostles Through Clement / The Apostolic Constitutions

63. Didascalia of Ignatius / Teachings of Ignatius

64. Didascalia of Polycarp / Teachings of Polycarp

After New Testament Era, incl. 1st-4th Centuries and Renaissance Era

65. The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testaments_of_the_Twelve_Patriarchs

66. The Apocryphon of John / The Secret Book of John
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocryphon_of_John

67. The Book of Revelation / The Revelation to John / The Apocalypse of John / The Revelation of Jesus Christ

68. The First, Second, and Third Epistles of John

69. The Book of Jubilees

70. The Pseudo-Clementine Pieces (incl. Paul's Letters)

71. The Hermetica / The Corpus Hermeticum
(Note: These texts are Egyptian-Greek texts from the 2nd century C.E., are attributed to Hermes Trimegistus ("Thrice-Great Hermes"), and include 18 chapters. Among these are the Emerald Tablet (also known as the Emerald Tablet of Thoth, the Smaragdine Tablet, and Tabula Smaragdina), and The Discourses of Isis to Horus.
There is also a book called The Kybalion, claimed to be written under influence of Hermes Trimegistus, which was published in 1908: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kybalion.)

72-74. The Three Rosicrucian Manifestos, incl.
72. Fama Fraternatis (Rosae Crucis [oder Die Bruderschaft des Ordens der Rosenkreuzer])
73. The Confessio (Fraternatis) / Confessio oder Bekenntnis der Societat und Bruderschaft Rosenkreuz)
74. The Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz

75. The Book of Mormon
(book of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints)

Alternative Bibles, and Modern Books, Containing Sets of Scriptural Texts
Which are Significantly Different from the King James Version of the Bible

76. "The Jefferson Bible" (The Moral Teachings of Jesus of Nazareth by Thomas Jefferson)

77. The Aitken Bible (early American Bible)

78. The Bible As History

79. The Pre-Nicene New Testament: Fifty-Four Formative Texts

80. "The List of Sixty" (books; from the 7th century C.E.)
http://depts.drew.edu/jhc/Blackhirst_Barnabas.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocrypha#List_of_Sixty

81. The Coptic Bible (which contains 109 or 111 books, including the Pistis Sophia, and The Gospel of Truth)
http://gnosis.org/library/pistis-sophia/index.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Truth

82. The Ethiopian Bible

83. The Catholic Bible

84. The Orthodox Bible

This is only a partial list. Please see the following links to learn more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deuterocanonical_books
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Gospels
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha

Compiled in 2018 and early 2019

Published on March 22nd, 2019

Edited and Expanded on April 18th and 30th, 2019,

and January 17th, 2021

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Sifre Deuteronomy 26: Moses and David

Moses and David

Sifre Deuteronomy 26 comments on Deuteronomy 3:23, the story in Scripture in which Moses asks God to allow him to cross the river Jordan and enter the land of Israel. The commentary focuses on the passage, “And I besought the Lord at that time, saying…,” among others, and independently addresses fragments of that passage. It discusses two leaders of Israel, Moses and David, and how they answered God for their sins. The text shows the difference between Moses’ and David’s methods of asking for forgiveness, and re-interprets the consequences of those methods as evidence that God will forgive a person who recognizes that they have sinned, recognizes what they are guilty of, and recognizes that they should be punished.

The first commentary on the scriptural passage focuses on the choice of the word used to describe the action Moses performed to God. This translation of Scripture uses “saying.” The commentary makes clear that here, “saying” is not simply an address from one person to another to be taken at face value and understood as one that does not stand in contrast to any other verb that could be used in its place. Rather, “saying” is one of several types of prayer and the word has been chosen over other verbs because of their connotations, which are to be understood based on context.

In Deuteronomy 3:23, “saying” is used in conjunction with “besought.” The commentary says that what Moses has said is explained by Proverb 18:23, which says, “The poor useth entreaties, but the rich answer impudently.” This can be interpreted as the author of the commentary saying that, since Moses uses the word “besought,” he is using entreaties, or that, because he uses the word “saying,” he is answering impudently. To agree with either would be to characterize Moses as either poor or rich, respectively.

After this, the commentary moves to the discussion of Moses’ request that God record his transgression. Moses says to God, “…let any transgression that I have committed be recorded against me, so that people will not say, ‘Moses seems to have falsified the Torah,’ or ‘said something he had not been commanded to say.’” Moses wants the sin of which he is guilty to be known, so that when the people know he has been punished and not allowed to enter the land of Israel, they will know the reason for his punishment and not assume he was punished for any other reason.

The sin of which Moses is guilty is having disobeyed God’s command that he speak to a rock so that water will issue forth from it. Moses instead struck the rock, which once before, on an occasion when God commanded Moses to do so, caused water to come.

Following this, a parable is told of a woman who gathered and ate unripe figs against the decree of the king, and was punished by being paraded in disgrace around the arena. The woman asked the king that her offense be publicly proclaimed so that the people will not think she is guilty of some other crime such as adultery or witchcraft.

According to Scripture, God told Moses that he recorded that the reason for Moses’ punishment was that he rebelled against God’s commandment that he speak to the rock.

The next parable tells of a king whose son was injured when they were traveling, and each time the king passed the scene of the accident after that, he would say that that was the place where his son was injured. The commentary draws a connection between this parable and what happened to Moses by saying, “Thus also God mentions three times the waters of contention…, as much to say, ‘This is where I doomed Miriam, …Aaron, [and]…Moses.’”

Following this parable, the commentary moves from Moses to David. The sin of which David is guilty is having caused the death of Uriah the Hittite and having married his wife Bathsheba. David said to God, “Let not this transgression committed by me be recorded against me.” This stands in contrast to Moses’ request to God that the transgression that he committed be recorded against him.

God denies David’s request by telling him, “It is not fitting for you that people should say, ‘God forgave him because He favors him.’” To not record David’s transgression would be to forgive him without David having asked for forgiveness. This is what sets Moses and David apart. Moses’ request that his transgression be recorded against him serves two purposes: it makes the truth known to the people, and it acts as an acknowledgement that Moses has sinned. Once Moses has acknowledged that he has rebelled against God, he is eligible for forgiveness. But because David has asked God not to acknowledge his sin, he will not be forgiven. Although David seeks the same ends as Moses, he sought forgiveness from God in the wrong way.

Next, a parable is told of a man who borrowed a large amount of wheat from the king. The people saw that it was such a large amount that it would be difficult for the man to repay the king, so they thought the king gave the wheat to the man as a gift. But when the man could not repay the king, the king sold the man’s family into slavery, so the people knew the wheat was not a gift and that the king held the man accountable.

In this parable, the king and the man represent God and David, the wheat represents the bounty that God gave to David, and the selling of the man’s family into slavery represents David’s punishment. The parable serves as a reminder that everything that David has was given to him by God, and David is obligated to repay him with obedience. Even though it may appear to the people that God favors David, God will punish anyone who does not fulfill their obligation to Him in exchange for everything He has bestowed upon them.

In 2 Samuel 12, Nathan tells David about a rich man who had many sheep and cattle and a poor man who had only one ewe lamb. When a hungry traveler came to them, the rich man slaughtered the poor man’s ewe lamb instead of slaughtering one of his own many cattle in order to feed the traveler. David immediately cursed the rich man for having no pity on the poor man, saying that the rich man is worthy of death and that he should pay for that ewe four times over.

Nathan then tells David that he represents the rich man in the story. Nathan reminds David of all that God has given him, and that he has sinned against God by causing the death of Uriah and marrying his wife. David then said to Nathan, “I have sinned against the Lord,” and Nathan said, “The Lord also hath put away thy sin; thou shalt not die.” Thus, as soon as David recognizes that he has sinned against God, he is absolved of his sin.

The commentary says that, as in the story of the men and the lamb, “So also all the punishments which came upon David were made multiple, as it is said, ‘And he shall restore the lamb fourfold.’” This is the author of the commentary suggesting that when David responded to the story by saying that the rich man should be punished fourfold, he caused his punishment to be made multiple.

The next section of the commentary says that Moses’ and David’s “meritorious deeds could have sustained the whole world, yet they begged the Holy One… only for a favor.” Then it is asked, “If those whose meritorious deeds could have sustained the whole world requested from the Holy One… only a favor, how much more so should a person who is not even one thousand-thousand-thousandth… part the disciples of their disciples beseech the Holy One… only for a favor.”

To say this is to assert that Moses’ and David’s good deeds entitle them to something. But it is also to say that the thing that God could have done in exchange for Moses’ and David’s good deeds was to sustain the whole world, and that Moses and David, by asking God for favors, forfeit the sustenance of the whole world in favor of the satisfaction of their own desires.

The next section of the commentary lists ten terms for prayer and cites examples from Scripture in which the different words are used.

Next, a parable is told about the people of a city, who thought of asking their king to grant their city the status of a colony, and they asked him after he had defeated two of his enemies, because they knew the time was right to do so. When Moses saw Sihon and Og defeated by God, he thought it would be a good time to ask Him to enter the land of Israel. The purpose of this parable is to explain the use of the phrase “at that time,” from the original Deuteronomy passage, “And I besought the Lord at that time, saying….”

Then, the text addresses the use of the word “saying.” It states several times that “Scripture does not use the term ‘saying’ except for a special purpose.” Between these statements, the text cites other passages in Scripture in which the word is used, each time re-interpreting Moses’ request to God that he be let into the land of Israel. The interpretations include “Let me know whether I will fall into their hands or not,” “Let me know whether Thou wilt redeem them or not,” “Tell me whether Thou wilt heal her or not,” “Let me know whether Thou wilt appoint leaders for them or not,” and “Let me know whether I will enter the land or not.”

The commentary ends by showing the distinction between two names of the Lord, Adonay and Elohim. By examining contexts in which each name for God is used, the commentary concludes that the name Adonay is used to refer to God’s quality of mercy, while the name Elohim is used to refer to his quality of justice.

Sifre Deuteronomy 26 takes the passage in which Moses asks God to allow him to enter the land of Israel and juxtaposes Moses’ relationship with God and David’s relationship to God to teach a lesson about not taking God’s gifts for granted and about the proper way to seek forgiveness from God. It discusses the meaning of “besought” and “saying” and clarifies the meaning of “at that time” in the original passage, and it also shows that Moses’ and David’s request for favors, which at surface value would appear to benefit them, actually would do harm to the whole world.

Written in October 2007 as a college essay

For more entries on world religions and mysticism, please visit:

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/syncretism-of-and-similarities-between.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/bwiti-religion-nganga-and-tabernanthe.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/10/distinctions-in-death-penalty.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2010/11/anarchistic-theocracy.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2011/02/terence-mckenna-and-novelty-calendar.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2011/04/materialism-stirner-vs-marx.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2013/07/letter-to-freedom-from-religion.html

http://www.aquarianagrarian.blogspot.com/2014/04/the-piscean-ethic-in-government-ecology.html

Distinctions in Death Penalty Sentencing in Sanhedrin 67

Tractate Sanhedrin, folio 67a-b of the Babylonian Talmud contains a discussion of the proper death penalty for a person who is found guilty of inciting others to idolatry and for a sorcerer.

Before going further into this discussion, some background on the death penalty is required.

In ancient Israel, stoning was the customary mode of execution. According to Josef Blinzler, “stoning became the regular mode of execution because the participation of the community was more possible than with any other form of execution.” Blinzler adds that the Old Testament “very often explicitly call[s] for… those who carry out the punishment [to] appear as ‘the whole community.’” It was necessary to involve the community in an execution because the whole community was thought to be responsible to God for the crime committed by the person being executed.

Blinzler, quoting I. Benzinger and Kurt Latte, says, “‘The whole community participates in the stoning as a way of riddling itself with guilt.’ ‘By showing his horror at the deed through casting his stone and dissociating himself from the perpetrator, each individual hoped to escape the vengeance of the gods who could visit unexpiated sins on the whole community.’” Blinzler also points out that it may be that the crime was perceived as directed at all the people, and not only at Yahweh, and therefore must be punished by as many people as possible, in order to “bring home to each individual in a particularly impressive and vivid way the reprehensibility of certain failings.”

According to Rabbi Richard A. Block, there is also “support for the notion that capital punishment was preventative. Since capital punishment was held to expiate the crime, it was also said to be in the interest of both society and the defendant.”

Considering that, according to Scripture, several explicitly mentioned types of incest, homosexuality, bestiality, blasphemy, several types of idolatry, profaning the Sabbath, cursing one’s father or mother, beguiling others to idolatry, sorcery, and being stubborn and rebellious are all deemed punishable by death, it would seem that the death penalty would be administered too frequently to be considered fair.

However, although the rabbis disagree on whether the death penalty should ever be imposed, “the anonymous mishnah, which presents the authoritative position, holds that the death penalty should be imposed infrequently, not never.”

David Novak describes the practice of hatra’ah, or ‘forewarning,’ which consists of the witnesses informing the criminal that he is about to commit a crime proscribed by the Torah, its punishment, the status of the victim, and the criminal telling the witnesses that he is going to commit the crime anyway. This was done to ensure that the criminal was compos mentis. It effectively made capital punishment very rare, as hatra’ah alerted the criminal to the presence of witnesses, and made it unlikely that the criminal would proceed with the crime.

Josef Blinzler explains why, according to Scripture, stoning has to be carried out outside the camp or the city. He quotes Rudolf Herzel in doing so: “[Taking the guilty party outside the house for the stoning] only became natural when, in accordance with the original intention of stoning, there was a desire to give the accused and condemned man the possibility of fleeing.” This explanation is one of several cited by Blinzler, including that people and property may be hurt if the stoning were to take place in the home, and so “the city should not be polluted by the corpse of the executed person.”

There are more specific accounts of execution in Scripture, but it is debatable whether these accounts were written as regulations concerning how the executions should take place or instead as descriptions of how the executions normally take place.

Chapter 6 of Sanhedrin gives an account of execution by stoning in which several steps are taken in a certain order, and each step is only necessary if the previous step does not cause the death of the accused person. The witness throws the accused to the ground, then witness by witness drops a stone on his heart. If this does not cause his death, he is stoned by all the people, after they all place their hands on him.

Chapter 7 of Sanhedrin gives accounts of execution by burning, beheading, and strangulation. To begin either, the people set the convicted “in dung up to his knees,” and then they put “a towel of coarse stuff within a towel of soft stuff,” and wrap it around his neck. They then pull on the ends of the towel.

R. Judah says, “If thus he died at their hands they would not have fulfilled the ordinance of burning.” This means that, as with the procedure of stoning, the burning or beheading is only necessary if the convicted does not die from the strangulation.According to Rabbi Richard A. Block, “Of the four [methods of execution], strangulation was preferred by rabbis because it was the one that did least injury to the body.”

If burning is necessary, two witnesses pull the ends of the towels until he opens his mouth, and a wick, or a strip of lead, is kindled and thrown into his mouth, burning his entrails. According to R. Judah, if beheading is necessary, it is to be done by placing the convicted’s head on a block, and the beheading performed with an axe, as the Roman method of using a sword is “shameful.”

At the beginning of folio 67a-b, Mishnah declares that a person who is found guilty of inciting others to idolatry “is brought to Beth Din and stoned.” Gemara explains that the person is only stoned because he is a layman, and that if he is a prophet, he is strangled. According to the Rabbis, prophet or not, a person who leads people astray is to be stoned and not strangled. The next Mishnah quote says that a sorcerer is liable to death if he actually performs magic, but he is not liable to death if he merely creates illusions.

Next, Gemara goes much deeper into discussion of the death penalty as the phrase “thou shalt not suffer a witch (to live)” is put under much scrutiny.

R. Jose the Galilean says that this phrase’s similarity to “thou shalt not suffer anything that breatheth (to live)” means that the punishment for sorcery is “the sword,” meaning beheading.

If the purpose of the death penalty is to remove from society those who have committed the gravest offenses, why is it necessary that there be a preferred method of execution for different types of people and for different crimes?

Chapter 7 of the Babylonian Talmud tractate Sanhedrin, in listing the four types of capital punishment that could be inflicted by the court, reveals that there is a descending order of gravity for the methods of execution: burning, stoning, strangulation, beheading. This may be a reason for differentiating the methods and a basis for deciding when each method is appropriate.

R. Akiba likens the phrase “thou shalt not suffer a witch (to live)” to “there shall not a hand touch it, but he shall surely be stoned, or shot through, whether it be beast or man, (it shall not live),” so he believes this similarity calls for the convicted to be stoned or shot through.

So why is being “shot through” not viewed as a separate method of execution from being stoned, as different as are strangulation, beheading, and burning?

Josef Blinzler offers the explanation that the phrase “stoned or shot through” unites the two methods of death because, since the stones and arrows are both thrown, and the person “is shot” by both objects. He mentions specifically Exodus 19.13, in which “Going on the mountain was strictly forbidden to everyone. Anyone who transgressed the command could only be got at by throwing stones or shooting arrows at him…”

R. Jose the Galilean contends that R. Akiba’s analogy is false because he wrongfully compares “thou shalt not suffer (to live)” with “it shall not live,” when R. Jose has made an analogy between ‘Thou shalt not suffer (to live)’ written in two verses.”

Because R. Akiba draws an analogy between two verses referring to Israelites, he disagrees with R. Jose the Galilean’s analogy because he believes it compares Israelites to heathens, “in whose case only one death penalty is decreed.”

Does this mean that when a heathen is sentenced to death, it is always by stoning? According to Scripture, “if a heathen committed adultery with a betrothed maiden, he is stoned; with a fully married woman, he is strangled,” so the way a heathen is executed is therefore subject to debate and not restricted to stoning.

R. Judah says of Ben ‘Azzai’s argument, “Shall we, because of this proximity, exclude the former from the easier death implied by an unspecific death sentence changing it to stoning?”, and takes the position that “as the ob and yidde’oni were singled out so that other sorcerers may be assimilated to them,” because they were stoned, all sorcerers are stoned.

This reference to “an unspecific death sentence” makes it necessary to ask when the method of execution is specified. According to Josef Blinzler, when the Old Testament calls for execution for a crime without specifying the mode of execution, it is assumed that the convicted is to be stoned.

On the contrary, Walter Jacob says that, in accordance with new rules, “Strangulation was used for all crimes in which no other death penalty was specified; it was considered the most humane method of execution.”

Bibliography

1. Blinzler, Josef. “The Jewish Punishment of Stoning in the New Testament Period.” The Trial

of Jesus. Ed. Ernst Bammel. Naperville, Ill.: Alec R. Allenson Inc., 1970. 147-161.

2. Block, Rabbi Richard A. “Capital Punishment.” Crime and Punishment in Jewish Law: Essays

and Responsa. Ed. Walter Jacob and Moshe Zemer. New York / Oxford: Berghan Books, 1999. 64-73.

3. m. Sanhedrin 7

4. Novak, David. “Can Capital Punishment Ever Be Justified in the Jewish Tradition?” Religion

and the Death Penalty: A Call for Reckoning. Ed. Erick C. Owens, John D. Carlson, and Eric P. Elshtain. Grand Rapids, Michigan / Cambridge, U.K.: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 2004. 31-47.

5. m. Sanhedrin 6

6. b. Sanhedrin 67a-b

7. b. Sanhedrin 57b

8. Jacob, Walter. “Punishment: Its Method and Purpose.” Crime and Punishment in Jewish Law:

Essays and Responsa. Ed. Walter Jacob and Moshe Zemer. New York / Oxford: Berghan Books, 1999. 45-63.

Written in October or November 2007 as a college essay

The Aquarian Agrarian

Friday, March 22, 2019

Eighty-Four Religious Texts Not Included in the King James Version of the Bible (Incomplete)

Sunday, October 24, 2010

Sifre Deuteronomy 26: Moses and David

Distinctions in Death Penalty Sentencing in Sanhedrin 67

How to Fold Two Square Pieces of Card Stock into a Box

Followers

Report Abuse