FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337  
338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   >>   >|  
rdy of their lives;" "the Lord God _is_ a sun and a shield;" "God _is_ love;" "the seven good ears _are_ seven years, and the seven good kine _are_ seven years;" "the tree of the field _is_ man's life;" "God _is_ a consuming fire;" "he _is_ his money," &c. A passion for the exact _literalities_ of the Bible is so amiable, it were hard not to gratify it in this case. The words in the original are (_Kaspo-hu_,) "his _silver_ is he." The objector's principle of interpretation is a philosopher's stone! Its miracle touch transmutes five feet eight inches of flesh and bones into _solid silver!_ Quite a _permanent_ servant, if not so nimble with all--reasoning against "_forever_," is forestalled henceforth, and, Deut. xxiii. 15, utterly outwitted. The obvious meaning of the phrase, "_He is his money_," is, he is _worth money_ to his master, and since, if the master had killed him, it would have taken money out of his pocket, the _pecuniary loss_, the _kind of instrument used_, and _the fact of his living some time after the injury_, (if the master _meant_ to kill, he would be likely to _do_ it while about it,) all together make a strong case of presumptive evidence clearing the master of _intent to kill_. But let us look at the objector's _inferences_. One is, that as the master might dispose of his _property_ as he pleased, he was not to be punished, if he destroyed it. Whether the servant died under the master's hand, or after a day or two, he was _equally_ his property, and the objector admits that in the _first_ case the master is to be "surely punished" for destroying _his own property!_ The other inference is, that since the continuance of a day or two, cleared the master of _intent to kill_, the loss of the slave would be a sufficient punishment for inflicting the injury which caused his death. This inference makes the Mosaic law false to its own principles. A _pecuniary loss_ was no part of the legal claim, where a person took the _life_ of another. In such case, the law spurned money, whatever the sum. God would not cheapen human life, by balancing it with such a weight. "Ye shall take NO SATISFACTION for the life of a murderer, but he shall surely be put to death." Num. xxxv. 31. Even in excusable homicide, where an axe slipped from the helve and killed a man, no sum of money availed to release from confinement in the city of refuge, until the death of the High Priest. Numb. xxxv. 32. The doctrine that the loss of the
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   313   314   315   316   317   318   319   320   321   322   323   324   325   326   327   328   329   330   331   332   333   334   335   336   337  
338   339   340   341   342   343   344   345   346   347   348   349   350   351   352   353   354   355   356   357   358   359   360   361   362   >>   >|  



Top keywords:
master
 

property

 
objector
 

silver

 

surely

 

inference

 
killed
 

servant

 
pecuniary
 
punished

intent

 

injury

 

pleased

 

sufficient

 

caused

 
inflicting
 

punishment

 

dispose

 

cleared

 

destroying


admits

 

equally

 
Whether
 

continuance

 
destroyed
 

spurned

 
homicide
 

slipped

 

excusable

 
availed

Priest
 

doctrine

 

release

 

confinement

 

refuge

 

murderer

 

SATISFACTION

 

person

 

Mosaic

 

principles


inferences

 

weight

 

balancing

 
cheapen
 
philosopher
 

miracle

 

interpretation

 

principle

 

original

 
transmutes