scholarly journals The Fourfold Gospel, Section IV., The Law of the New Kingdom

1916 ◽  
Vol 9 (36) ◽  
pp. 316
Author(s):  
N. J. D. White ◽  
Edwin A. Abbott
Keyword(s):  
New Kingdom ◽  
The Law ◽  
Fourfold Gospel

scholarly journals Importing the law? Possible elements of the Mesopotamian legal tradition in New Kingdom Egypt (1549-1064BCE)

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Loktionov
Keyword(s):  
Corporal Punishment ◽  
New Kingdom ◽  
Middle Kingdom ◽  
Legal Tradition ◽  
Standard Element ◽  
The Law ◽  
Seti I

 Features of New Kingdom (1549-1064BCE[1]) justice not attested earlierOracle courts, as attested at Deir el-Medina[2] and elsewhere[3]Increase in severe corporal punishment: for example, mutilation of nose and ears becomes a standard element in oath formulae[4]Detailed protasis-apodosis legal decrees, such as the Karnak Decree of Horemheb[5] (1328-1298BCE) or the Nauri Decree of Seti I[6] (1296-1279).  Why might this be connected to Mesopotamia/Semitic law?“Hyksos” period (1650-1549BCE) immediately prior to New KingdomAmarna letters/greater exposure to Akkadian in Egypt during New KingdomLegal associations: Akkadian and Egyptian copies of Ramesses II – Hattusili III treaty[7] (1258BCE), where corporal punishment is a prominent topicMesopotamian law, and broader scholarship, often associated with protasis-apodosis[8]Mesopotamian law often associated with severe corporal punishment: for instance, see Code of Hammurabi (1792-1750BCE)[9], Middle Assyrian Laws[10] (c.1400-1100BCE) etc.Why might this NOT be connected to Mesopotamia/Semitic law?Were earlier periods truly different, or is this down to chance preservation of sources?Protasis-apodosis has precedents in the Middle Kingdom (2066-1650BCE): for instance, see 2nd Semna stela of Senusret III (1865BCE)[11] or Illahun Medical papyri (c.1800BCE)[12]. [1] All Egyptian dates are calculated according to the chronology set forth in Dodson & Hilton 2004: 287-294, while Mesopotamian dates follow the chronology in van de Mieroop 2007: 302-317.[2] McDowell 1990: 143-186.[3] Kákosy 1975: 600-606; Černy 1962: 35-48.[4] Lorton 1977: 33-38, 50-51; Tyldesley 2000: 81.[5] Kruchten 1981.[6] Kitchen 1975-1990: 53-55 (text 24); Davies 1997: 277-308.[7] Langdon & Gardiner 1920.[8] Bottéro 1992: 125-137, 156-184; Roth 1997.[9] Roth 1997: 71-142; Richardson 2000.[10] Driver & Miles 1935; Roth 1997: 153-194.[11] Sethe 1924: 83-84.[12] Quirke 2002; Collier & Quirke 2004: 53-64.

scholarly journals Koncepcje mesjańskie judaizmu po deportacji babilońskiej

2004 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 173
Author(s):  
Sylwester Jędrzejewski
Keyword(s):  
New Kingdom ◽  
Relationship With God ◽  
Son Of God ◽  
Son Of Man ◽  
Political Independence ◽  
Great Leader ◽  
Way Of Thinking ◽  
The Law ◽  
House Of David ◽  
Deep Relationship

Dramatic events of year 587/586 triggered off a new way of thinking of Israelites over their history. It helped to think about resurrection not only in a traditional way – a ruler from the House of David, the King–Messiah and the Shepherd–Messiah. The lacks of political independence made people think of a new Kingdom. They were looking for a nationalist Messiah, who would realistically restore the kingdom of David and Salomon. The Son of Man, through his deep relationship with God, expressed a longing for ideal Kingdom, where God can reign. The Messiah, just and chosen by God, would represent those, who saw Israel as a great Kingdom of Israel, perfectly keeping the Law and living in peace. The Son of God, mysterious pre-existent Messiah, represents those, who yearn for a new and great leader, who is supported by almighty God and who would restore a worldly, wonderful Kingdom.

scholarly journals Book Review: The Law of the New Kingdom

1916 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-403
Author(s):  
A. T. Robertson
Keyword(s):  
New Kingdom ◽  
The Law

scholarly journals The Fourfold Gospel: Section III. The Proclamation of the New Kingdom.

1916 ◽  
Vol 9 (33) ◽  
pp. 79
Author(s):  
N. J. D. W. ◽  
Edwin A. Abbott
Keyword(s):  
New Kingdom ◽  
Fourfold Gospel

Ethical Challenges: Less About Moral Wrongdoing and More About Communication Breakdown

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 72-84 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paula Leslie ◽  
Mary Casper
Keyword(s):  
Ethical Challenges ◽  
Speech Language Pathology ◽  
Thickened Liquids ◽  
Communication Breakdown ◽  
Professional Duty ◽  
Language Pathology ◽  
The Law ◽  
Personal Case

“My patient refuses thickened liquids, should I discharge them from my caseload?” A version of this question appears at least weekly on the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association's Community pages. People talk of respecting the patient's right to be non-compliant with speech-language pathology recommendations. We challenge use of the word “respect” and calling a patient “non-compliant” in the same sentence: does use of the latter term preclude the former? In this article we will share our reflections on why we are interested in these so called “ethical challenges” from a personal case level to what our professional duty requires of us. Our proposal is that the problems that we encounter are less to do with ethical or moral puzzles and usually due to inadequate communication. We will outline resources that clinicians may use to support their work from what seems to be a straightforward case to those that are mired in complexity. And we will tackle fears and facts regarding litigation and the law.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document