scholarly journals The law of Christ

2000 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. 537-546 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL WINGER
Keyword(s):  
Jewish Law ◽  
The Law

Paul's phrase ‘the law of Christ’, used without explanation in Gal 6.2, means neither some form of words (such as Lev 19.18), nor a norm constituted by the example of Christ himself. It is rather a metaphor for what, in the life of those who belong to Christ, occupies the place that law had in the life of those who came before Christ: it means the Spirit, as described in Gal 5.16–25. Incidentally, the phrase serves to relativize ‘law’, implying that the Jewish law is just one form of law and not the highest.

The Right to Return: The Biblical Law of Theft

2010 ◽  
pp. 28-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eliakim Katz ◽  
Jacob Rosenberg
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Economic Model ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Biblical Law ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

This article focuses on the law surrounding the biblical law of theft. According to Jewish Law, a thief who is caught and found guilty must return the stolen article and, in addition, pay the owner a fine equal to the value of the article. The thief can avoid this fine by admitting to the theft on his own initiative in a court and returning the stolen article to its owner. This article refers to such canceling of a fine as a pardon. The pardon is explained in the Talmud by the legal dictum “Mode BeKnass Patur,” that is “he who confesses in a fine is exempt”. This article carefully explains economic model with the help of various graphs. This article also explains two issues which require consideration in assessing whether Eliezer acted properly as an agent according to Jewish law. A detailed analysis of concepts of duty in Judaism concludes this article.

A Law-Observant Mission to Gentiles: The Background of Galatians

1985 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 307-324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis Martyn
Keyword(s):  
New Testament ◽  
Jewish People ◽  
Early Church ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
The New Testament ◽  
The Law ◽  
Jewish Christians

That the early church was intensely and passionately evangelistic is clear to every reader of the documents that make up the New Testament. Equally clear, or so it would seem, is the scholarly consensus that when Christian evangelists took the step of reaching beyond the borders of the Jewish people, they did so without requiring observance of the Jewish law. The work of these evangelists, in turn, is said to have sparked a reaction on the part of firmly observant Jewish Christians, who, seeing the growth of the Gentile mission, sought to require observance of the Law by its converts. Struggles ensued, and the outcome, to put the matter briefly, was victory for the mission to the Gentiles, for the Law-free theology characteristic of that mission, and for the churches produced by it.

The Employee Free Choice Act, Unions, and Unionizing in Jewish Law

2010 ◽  
pp. 428-444
Author(s):  
Dani Rapp
Keyword(s):  
Labor Unions ◽  
Free Choice ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Employee Relationships ◽  
Employee Relationship ◽  
The Law ◽  
Equitable Treatment

Employees, their free choice act, and unions and unionizing in Jewish law are the essence of this article. The law equalizes the imbalance by allowing employees to unionize, putting the negotiating power of employees on par with their employers. By banding together, organized workers gain the ability to strike, neutralizing management's ability to withhold employment. The approach of the Jewish law towards the employer–employee relationship is explained in detail. It says employer–employee relationships are no exception. Each side has rights and obligations, ensuring that the worker receives equitable treatment and the employer receives the full value of the employee's labor. The Talmud clarifies that one who withholds a worker's pay actually transgresses five negative commandments and one positive commandment. This article also traces various sources found in Jewish laws relating to labor unions and the power of the citizens and tradesmen. An explanation of the regularization of Jewish law winds up this article.

Economic Substance and The Laws of Interest: A Comparison of Jewish and U.S. Federal Tax Law

2010 ◽  
pp. 478-498
Author(s):  
Adam Chodorow
Keyword(s):  
Detailed Analysis ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Tax Law ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
The Us ◽  
Tax Laws ◽  
Two Systems ◽  
Federal Taxation ◽  
The Law ◽  
Practical Constraints

Both Jewish law and U.S. Federal tax law define interest broadly as a payment for the use of money. Nonetheless, the two systems diverge widely when determining whether particular transactions involve interest. This article compares the different approaches to the laws of interest found in these two systems, in an effort to reveal how underlying goals, practical constraints, and the structure of the legal system affects the development of the law. This article explains the laws of interest. The Torah mentions ribbit three times. The first occurs in Exodus the second mention is found in Leviticus and the final occurs in Deuteronomy. Moving forward this article explains the federal taxation of interest which says that interest is not banned under the federal tax laws, but it is often treated differently from other types of payments. A detailed analysis comparing the Jewish and the US approaches to interest concludes this article.

The Theory of “Efficient Breach”: A Jewish Law Perspective

2010 ◽  
pp. 339-360
Author(s):  
Ronald Warburg
Keyword(s):  
Economic Efficiency ◽  
Law And Economics ◽  
Moral Norm ◽  
Legal Norm ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Distinguishing Characteristic ◽  
Moral Norms ◽  
Inside Information ◽  
Human Organs ◽  
The Law

This article focuses on the theory of efficient breach from the perspective of the Jewish law. The law and economics schools of thought have advanced a number of controversial claims in the name of economic efficiency—from promoting trading on inside information to providing markets for the sale of human organs—but none may be as provocative and challenging as the argument of entitlement and economic efficiency underlying the theory of “efficient breach.” This article explains various Jewish laws such as halakhah. Halakhah distinguishes between legal and moral norms. The distinguishing characteristic between them is enforceability. Whereas a halakhic-legal norm is enforceable by a bet din, compliance with a halakhic moral norm is dependent upon individual volition. There are two components required in the undertaking of an obligation: effectuating a kinyan and gemirat da'at. This article further elaborates upon every other clause pertaining to Jewish law and Judaism which concludes this article.

The Law in the Late Second Temple Period

2019 ◽  
pp. 366-382
Author(s):  
John J. Collins
Keyword(s):  
Dead Sea Scrolls ◽  
Second Temple ◽  
Dead Sea ◽  
Second Century ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
Jewish Tradition ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Second Temple Period ◽  
The Dead ◽  
The Law

The Torah of Moses was recognized as the ancestral law of Judah from the time of Ezra. Its status was revoked briefly by Antiochus Epiphanes. In the Hasmonean era there was a turn to intensive halakhic discussion, attested in the Dead Sea Scrolls. This was a factor in the rise of sectarianism. The papyri from the early second century ce take a flexible attitude to laws, drawing on Jewish or Roman law as seemed advantageous. The literature from the Hellenistic Diaspora treats the law broadly as a summary of Jewish tradition. Despite some claims that the law functioned as a civic law in the Diaspora, there are only a few instances in the papyri where Jews base appeals on Jewish law, and we do not know what the judges decided in those cases.

The Book of Esther: A Hellenistic Book

2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 279-302
Author(s):  
Beate Ego
Keyword(s):  
Jewish Law ◽  
Hellenistic Period ◽  
Holy War ◽  
The Law

The dating of the book of Esther remains a contested issue. Scholars who date the book to the Persian or Hellenistic period reflect attention not only to when the book was written, but also to the circumstances around its composition. Points that contribute to the dating of the text include an understanding of the Persian elements in the narrative, the historical setting in which it was composed, and the treatment of foreign domination in the book. A shift in focus from individual elements of the book to an integrated consideration of the book as a whole supports the argument in favor of a Hellenistic dating and a diaspora location for the origins of this book. Among the elements that contribute to this conclusion are the theological claims that underlie the Persian motifs, especially the rejection of proskynesis before a human ruler (Haman or Alexander), the book’s reversal structure, its treatment of Holy War, and the veiled speech of God. The negotiation of rule by foreign powers in light of the tension between Jewish law and the law of an external empire supports a pre-Hasmonean origin for the book.

The Law of Adjudication

2011 ◽  
pp. 36-52
Author(s):  
David Novak
Keyword(s):  
Political Authority ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
The Law

This chapter discusses the law of adjudication. The rabbinic tradition presents two divergent positions on the nature of the law of adjudication. The first position, articulated most fully by Maimonides, was that this law was to be imposed upon gentiles by Jews; that is, ideally, Jewish judges would arbitrate Noahide laws for gentiles. The second position, advocated by Nahmanides, holds that non-Jews establish and maintain their own courts separate from Jewish courts, and judge based on the general principles of Noahide law. The chapter then looks at how the rabbis consistently moved Jewish law in the direction of Jewish and non-Jewish equality in matters of civil jurisprudence. The law of adjudication was also used by the rabbis to justify non-Jewish political authority over Jews. Finally, the chapter explores the principle of dina d'malkhuta dina (the law of the land is the law).

The Law of Robbery

2011 ◽  
pp. 127-134
Author(s):  
David Novak
Keyword(s):  
Central Element ◽  
Double Standard ◽  
Jewish Law ◽  
Human Society ◽  
Human Flourishing ◽  
The Law ◽  
Anti Jewish

This chapter focuses on the prohibition of robbery, which is based on the principle that society is necessary for human flourishing. And a central element of the construction of any human society is property, or the relation of persons to things, especially in economic transactions. The rabbinic tradition makes fine distinctions between Jews and gentiles regarding robbery, ultimately creating a double standard. Although the practical effects of a socially unfair law were removed, the rabbis maintained that Noahide law remained stricter than Jewish law regarding robbery. Like other violations of the Noahide commandments, the penalty was assumed to be death. In atypical historical circumstances—especially times of war or oppression—the rabbinic supposition was that all gentile robbery was aggressive and occurred because of anti-Jewish attitudes and not greed. Because the crime was ideological and not practical, its intent was far more lethal and therefore any act of robbery, no matter how minor, was to be punished with death.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document